Doe

Doe v. Hagee

Good Law
473 F. Supp. 2d 989·2007 WL 127990·2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 5905
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaJanuary 12, 2007C 06-1777 MHPCalifornia5,059 words

Opinion

Opinion

Patel, J.

MEMORANDUM & ORDER

Re: Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss

On March 8, 2006 plaintiffs Jane Doe and Mary Roe filed a complaint for injunc-tive relief and damages against defendants General Michael Hagee, Commandant of the United States Marine Corps; the United States Marine Corps; Donald Winter, Secretary of the Navy; Department of the Navy; Sergeant Brian Fukushima and Staff Sergeant Joseph Dunzweiler alleging that defendants violated plaintiffs’ right to bodily integrity under the Fifth Amendment of the United States Constitution. Plaintiffs also allege claims sounding in tort under the Federal Tort Claims Act. On July 21, 2006 plaintiffs filed an amended complaint and have subsequently filed a second amended complaint. Now before the court is defendants’ motion to dismiss under Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1), for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, and Rule 12(b) (6), for failure to state a claim, or in the alternative, under Rule 12(e), for a more definite statement and Rule 12(b)(5) for insufficient service of process. Having considered the parties’ arguments and submissions, and for the reasons set forth below, the court enters the following memorandum and…

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.