Research chronology · 2026-02-17 to 2026-05-27

Saladino post-trilogy / parallel-action extension

Fourteen days after the Feb. 3, 2026 R&R described earlier Saladino matters as a trilogy, Tufano filed a new original federal Saladino/Heart & Soil case on Feb. 17 and the existing state compilation records a Lackawanna Saladino case the same day. The state case was later removed and consolidated into the federal action.

Strongest source-backed point

The May 27 federal order expressly consolidated removed case 3:26-cv-01266 into 3:26-cv-00396, denied default judgment as premature and issued a show-cause deadline concerning service.

Research assessment

Strong evidence of continued and parallel litigation involving Saladino/Heart & Soil after the earlier trilogy was judicially identified; however, the claims in the state complaint have not been directly compared.

Important caveat

Do not describe C061/C032 as identical claims or as a refiling after judgment. The state complaint was filed before C055's March 20 final dismissal and is inaccessible through the current browser.

Cases in this sequence

Timeline

Original federal complaint filed

Tufano filed C061 in M.D. Pa. against Paul Saladino, MD and Heart & Soil Supplements LLC.

Federal docket indexes C061 as an original action filed Feb. 17, 2026. · Docket-confirmed filing

Source ↗
Parallel state complaint filed

A Lackawanna County Saladino case (2026-00838 / 26-cv-838) is recorded on the same date as C061.

The later federal Notice of Removal identifies state case 26-cv-838; direct state pleading remains inaccessible to this research browser. · Cross-source relationship

Source ↗
State action removed

Paul Saladino removed Lackawanna County case 26-cv-838 to M.D. Pa. as 3:26-cv-01266.

Filing 1 is an explicit Notice of Removal and includes the county court record as an attachment. · Confirmed removal

Source ↗
Federal actions consolidated

The court consolidated 3:26-cv-01266 into 3:26-cv-00396, denied Tufano's default-judgment motion as premature, and ordered him to show cause by June 5 why the matter should not be dismissed for failure to effect proper service.

The consolidation order judicially establishes that the two federal proceedings were sufficiently related for consolidation. · Court consolidation/order

Source ↗

Primary source

Open primary source ↗