(PS) Hanible v. County of Solano Sheriff's Office

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaJanuary 11, 20222:21-cv-01315California3,518 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 BRIHANA HANIBLE, No. 2:21-cv-1315 JAM DB PS Plaintiff, v. ORDER SOLANO COUNTY SHERIFF’S OFFICE, et al., 15 Defendants, 17 Plaintiff Brihana Hanible is proceeding in this action pro se. This matter was referred to the undersigned in accordance with Local Rule 302(c)(21) and 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Pending before the undersigned are defendants’ motion to dismiss pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and plaintiff’s motion for leave to amend, motion for a temporary restraining order, motion to reopen discovery, and motion for discovery. (ECF Nos. 6, 9, 12, 14, 15.) For the reasons stated below, defendants’ motion to dismiss is granted, plaintiff is granted leave to file an amended complaint, and plaintiff’s remaining motions are denied. BACKGROUND Plaintiff, proceeding pro se, commenced this action on July 26, 2021, by filing a complaint and later paying the…

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.