Opinion ID: 618828
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: analysis

Text: On remand,3 the District Court followed our instructions, analyzed Viola’s due process claim in light of our decision in Dee v. Borough of Dunmore, 549 F.3d 225 (3d Cir. 2008), and applied the factors set forth in Mathews v. Eldridge, 424 U.S. 319 (1976). The District Court’s opinion is thorough and well-reasoned. There is no due process violation here. 3 Contrary to Viola’s position before this Court, our prior decision returned the summary judgment motion to the District Court for additional analysis. See 18B Charles Alan Wright & Arthur R. Miller, Federal Practice and Procedure, §4478.3 (2d ed.) (“[I]t is the court of appeals that has authority to determine what it meant [in its remand decision].”) Viola’s argument that no motion filed by the Defendants was pending before the District Court is without merit. 3