Crail

(PS) Ingram v. Crail

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaAugust 16, 20192:18-cv-01976California2,759 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 MICHAEL INGRAM EL, No. 2:18-cv-1976-MCE-EFB PS

12 Plaintiff, FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS v.

JOE CRAIL; WESTERN MUTUAL

INSURANCE; RESIDENCE MUTUTAL

INSURANCE,

16 Defendants.

18 This case is before the court on defendants’ motion to dismiss plaintiff’s First Amended Complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure (“Rule”) 12(b)(1) and defendant Joe Crail’s motion to dismiss for insufficient service of process pursuant to Rule 12(b)(5). ECF No. 18. As discussed below, the motions must be granted.2 ///// /////

1 This case, in which plaintiff is proceeding pro se, is before the undersigned pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) and Eastern District of California Local Rule 302(c)(21).

2 The court determined that oral argument would not be of material assistance in resolving the motions and they were submitted without oral argument pursuant to Eastern District of California Local Rule…

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.