(PS) Narayan v. County of Sacramento

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaMay 7, 20212:19-cv-00466California1,349 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 PRAKASH NARAYAN, No. 2:19-cv-0466-TLN-CKD PS Plaintiff, ORDER v. (ECF No. 113) COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO, et al., Defendants. 16 17 Presently before the court is plaintiff’s latest motion for the undersigned to recuse herself from this case. (ECF No. 113.) The County defendants—the only defendants remaining in this action—have filed an opposition. (ECF No. 114). On the court’s own motion and pursuant to Local Rule 230(g), the matter is taken under submission, and the court now DENIES plaintiff’s motion for the following reasons.1

1 The court need not await plaintiff’s optional reply brief before issuing this order because plaintiff’s motion is once again improperly noticed. Plaintiff filed the motion on April 28, 2021 25 and noticed the matter for hearing on May 19, 2021 at 11:00 am. (ECF No. 113 at 1.) This is less than the 28-days’ notice required by this court’s Local Rules, see E.D. Cal. L.R. 230(b), and the 26…

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.