Passick
Passick v. United States Department of Housing and Urban Development
Opinion
Trial Court Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 9 In re: THE VIDA L. EDDY LIVING Case No.: 24-cv-656-L-DDL
TRUST
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT
BRADLEY PASSICK, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT
OF HOUSING AND URBAN
Plaintiff,
DEVELOPMENT’S MOTION TO
v. DISMISS
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF [ECF No. 7]
HOUSING AND URBAN
DEVELOPMENT,
17 Defendant.
19 Pending before the Court is Defendant United States Department of Housing and 20 Urban Development’s (“HUD”) motion to dismiss pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil 21 Procedure 12(b)(1) and (5) for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction and insufficient service. 22 (ECF No. 7.) Plaintiff did not oppose the motion within the time for filing an opposition 23 or otherwise request additional time to respond. See Civ. Loc. Rule 7.1.e.2. HUD’s 24 motion is therefore granted as unopposed. See Civ. Loc. Rule 7.1.f.3.c; Ghazali v. 25 Moran, 46 F.3d 52, 53-54 (9th Cir. 1995). All claims asserted against Defendant HUD 26 are dismissed without prejudice. 27 // 28 …