Allen v. United States, 2025 WL 35468, No. 24-99-KSM (E.D. Pa. Jan. 3, 2025)
A federal court dismissed a negligence claim against the United States Postal Service (USPS) after the plaintiff failed to timely oppose the government’s motion and later submitted a late filing without permission. Citing clear precedent and the plaintiff’s lack of discovery efforts, the court granted both the motion to strike and summary judgment, ultimately dismissing the case.
The United States Attorney’s Office moved to dismiss a negligence claim on behalf of the United States Postal Service (USPS) following discovery. The plaintiff failed to timely file opposition and then filed it late without permission. The USPS then moved to strike the late filing.
The District Court ultimately granted both the motion to strike and summary judgment, thus dismissing the case. In addition to citing clear precedent that ignorance of the law in terms of correct deadlines for late filings is not a sufficient excuse to require the court to entertain the opposition, the court further noted the prima facie strength of the underlying motion and the plaintiff’s failure to conduct discovery; where the plaintiff never took a single deposition nor served any written demands on the Government. The evidentiary record showed that the plaintiff had run a red light and collided with the USPS tractor-trailer.
Considering all these issues, the court granted summary judgment and dismissed the action.
