(PS)Selck

(PS)Selck v. Williams

Bad Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaMarch 4, 20202:19-cv-00952California2,294 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 9 MORREY SELCK, No. 2:19-cv-952-JAM-EFB PS Plaintiff, v. ORDER AND FINDINGS AND

RECOMMENDATIONS

COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO BOARD

OF SUPERVISORS, TOMOKO

WILLIAMS, Defendants. 16 17 Several motions are pending in this action, which are addressed herein1: 18 1. Defendants’ motion to dismiss plaintiff’s original complaint for lack of subject matter 19 jurisdiction and failure to state a claim pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 20 (“Rule”) 12(b)(1) and Rule 12(b)(6) or, in the alternative, for a more definite statement 21 pursuant to Rule 12(e) (ECF No. 7); 22 2. Plaintiff’s motions for injunctive relief (ECF Nos. 9 & 18); 23 3. Plaintiff’s motions to amend the complaint2; and

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

Before defendants moved to dismiss the original complaint, plaintiff amended…

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.