LucidWorks

Tahtiana Jade Brown v. Lucidworks, et al.

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaNovember 19, 20252:25-cv-00607California1,354 words

Opinion

trial_court Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 TAHTIANA JADE BROWN, No. 2:25-cv-0607-DC-CKD (PS) 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 14 LUCIDWORKS, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 Plaintiff Tahtiana Brown filed this case without counsel and this matter is before the 18 undersigned pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) and Local Rule 302(c)(21). Defendants 19 Lucidworks, Inc., Hammett, Pascuzzi, Kirby, and Sinoway have filed a motion to dismiss under 20 Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b). (ECF No. 78.) This motion is appropriate for decision 21 without oral argument under Local Rule 230(g). For the reasons set forth below, the motion 22 should be granted. 23 BACKGROUND 24 Plaintiff initiated this action with a complaint filed on February 21, 2025, asserting seven 25 causes of action against multiple defendants. (ECF No. 1.) The defendants moved to dismiss 26 plaintiff’s claims and the district judge assigned to this case dismissed the complaint on July 29, 27 2025. (ECF…

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.