Carter

Carter v. Jackson

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaSeptember 11, 20241:23-cv-01775California4,275 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JEFFREY CARTER, Case No. 1:23-cv-01775-KES-SAB

Plaintiff, FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

RECOMMENDING GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S

v. RULE 41(a)(2) MOTION TO DISMISS

WITHOUT PREJUDICE; DENYING

WILLARD L. JACKSON, et al., DEFENDANT PETRESCU’S MOTION TO

DISMISS AS MOOT

Defendants.

VACATING OCTOBER 2, 2024 HEARING

13 (ECF Nos. 59, 60, 63, 64)

OBJECTIONS DUE WITHIN FOURTEEN DAYS

15 I. INTRODUCTION Currently before the Court are Defendant Vicent Petrescu’s1 motion to dismiss pursuant to Rules 12(b)(2) and 12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (ECF No. 59) and Plaintiff Jeffrey Carter’s motion for voluntary dismissal pursuant to Rule 41(a)(2) (ECF No. 60). The Court, having reviewed the record, finds both matters suitable for decision without oral argument. See Local Rule 230(g). Accordingly, the hearing set for October 2, 2024, will be vacated. Based on the moving and opposition papers, as well as the…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.