Icon Desert Logistics v. City of Blythe

Good Law
United States District Court, Central District of CaliforniaApril 18, 20225:20-cv-02225California7,866 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

I. INTRODUCTION

On June 18, 2019, plaintiffs Icon Desert Logistics (“Icon”), Thomas Lawson, Xiaotong Liu, and Keyao Yu filed this action in the Superior Court for the County of Riverside. Dkt. 1. Plaintiffs allege that on June 14, 2018, officers from the City of Blythe Police Department and the County of Riverside Sherriff's Department raided plaintiffs’ facility for cultivating medical marijuana, located at 401 W. Barnard St. in Blythe, California. Id. On June 1, 2020, plaintiffs filed the first amended complaint. Id. On September 23, 2020, plaintiffs filed the second amended complaint against defendants the City of Blythe and the County of Riverside (“the municipal defendants’); Doe Moreno and Doe Hedges, both sued fictitiously (the “officer defendants”); and Does 1-250, asserting federal claims for the first ttme. Dkt. 1-1 (“SAC”). The second amended complaint alleges claims for: (1) violation of plaintiffs’ federal constitutional rights to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (against the officer defendants, and the unnamed Doe defendants); (2) violation of the Bane Civil Rights Act, Cal. Civ. Code § 52.1 (“the Bane Act’)…

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.