Ramos

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 OSCAR RAMOS, No. 2:24-cv-02117-SCR 12 Plaintiff, 13 ORDER v. 14

STAVROULA PISTIOLAS,

15 16 Defendant. 17 18 The parties this case have consented to proceed before a United States Magistrate Judge. 19 See 28 U.S.C. § 636(c); ECF No. 13. Accordingly, this matter was assigned to the undersigned 20 for all purposes. ECF No. 13. Now before the Court is Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 21 14), which the Court heard on February 13, 2025. For the reasons set forth below, the Motion is 22 granted. 23 I. Background and Procedural History 24 Plaintiff filed this action on August 6, 2024. Plaintiff alleged violations of the 25 Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (42 U.S.C. §§ 12101, et seq.) (herein “ADA”) and 26 California state law, including violation of California Civil Code §§ 51, et seq. (the Unruh Act).1 27 1 California’s Unruh Civil Rights Act “operates virtually identically to the ADA.” Molski v. M.J. 28 Cable, Inc., 481 F.3d 724, 731 (9th…