Lack of jurisdictionFebruary 3, 2026
Court adopted the R&R and dismissed the complaint without prejudice for lack of jurisdiction.
Court source ↗Tufano v. Saladino, MD et al
4:25-cv-01960 · U.S. District Court, Middle District of Pennsylvania
ClosedDismissedPennsylvania
CourtU.S. District Court, Middle District of Pennsylvania
FiledOctober 17, 2025
StatusClosed
OutcomeDismissed
Final dispositionWithout prejudice
JurisdictionPennsylvania
Pro seYes
Current / transferee court—
Transferred case—
Defendants
- Jeffrey Davis Esq
- David D. Lin Esq
- Karoline Mehalchick
- Paul Saladino MD
- The Illuminati
- Union Lodge #291
- White Plains Lodge #473
Source record
This page separates court findings, party filings, research classifications and public statements. Unknown or unresolved fields remain labelled as such.
Outcome and research status
Outcome reason: Complaint dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.
Research status: Source-backed
Research notes: The C055 R&R expressly identifies C059 as a third similar action against the same defendants, making identical factual allegations and raising the same claims as C055; it added Judge Mehalchick after she dismissed C048.
Related litigation
- Previous related case: 3:25-cv-01400 — Tufano v. Saladino, MD et al
- Dispute group: Saladino-related litigation
Court findings
Filing-restriction indicators
Strength labels are research classifications, not judicial declarations that the litigant is vexatious.
StrongThird similar action with same claims / defendants
C055 R&R identifies C059 as a third similar action against the same defendants, making identical factual allegations and raising the same claims as C055; C059 was later dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.
Source ↗Chronology events
Sequence does not by itself prove motive or causation.
Third similar complaint filed
Tufano filed a third similar action against the same defendants; it also added Judge Karoline Mehalchick.
Source ↗R&R and related dismissal
The C055 R&R recommended dismissal with no further leave to amend; on the same date C059 was dismissed for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction.
Source ↗Secondary sources
Commentary from former counsel or other secondary sources is retained separately from court findings and primary-source records.
Saladino v. Frank Tufano 20-cv-9346 – Decision on Mr. Tufano's Motion to Vacate His DefaultFebruary 16, 2026
Davis summarizes the representation/default chronology in C100 and points readers to the Jan. 29, 2026 Opinion & Order. The underlying court record independently confirms counsel was relieved Feb. 23, 2021, no answer was filed, default followed, and the earlier motion to vacate default was denied after the court found willful default and no meritorious defense.
Evidentiary treatment: Blog commentary is secondary. Court findings about default, motions, and representation are recorded in COURT_FINDINGS only where supported by the court opinions/docket.
Secondary source ↗