Herbst
Bravo Acevedo v. Herbst
Opinion
Trial Court Opinion
I. INTRODUCTION
20 Plaintiff Maria Consuelo Bravo Acevedo, proceeding pro se, initiated this action by filing 21 a complaint on January 26, 2024. (Doc. 1). Plaintiff filed a First Amended Complaint (the “FAC”) 22 on July 8, 2024, naming Kaweah Health, the cities of Visalia and Tulare, and the State of California, 23 as defendants. (Doc. 8). Defendant Kaweah Health filed the instant Motion to Dismiss (Doc. 18) 24 on August 19, 2024. Plaintiff has not filed an opposition, and the time to do so has passed. See 25 Local Rule 230. On September 12, 2024, Kaweah Health filed a notice of non-opposition, 26 highlighting Plaintiff’s failure to respond to Defendant’s motion. (Doc. 21).
28 The motion was referred to the undersigned for the preparation of findings and recommendations. (Doc. 19). While the Court may treat Plaintiff’s failure to file a timely opposition as a non-opposition, the undersigned will address the merits of Plaintiff’s claims because they are plainly insufficient under Rule 8. For the reasons set forth below, the undersigned recommends that Defendant Kaweah Health’s Motion to Dismiss (Doc. 18) be granted.