Jenna Noble v. Dorcy Inc.
Opinion
Trial Court Opinion
O
2 3 4 5 6 7 United States District Court 8 Central District of California 9 10 11 JENNA NOBLE, Case No. 2:19-cv-08646-ODW (JPRx) Plaintiff,
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’
v.
MOTION TO DISMISS [41];
14 DORCY INC. et al. DENYING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION Defendants. FOR ORDER MODIFYING THE
SCHEDULING ORDER [51]
17 I. INTRODUCTION Defendants Dorcy Inc. and Dorcy Pruter (collectively, “Defendants”) move to 20 dismiss certain claims in Plaintiff Jenna Noble’s (“Noble”) First Amended Complaint 21 alleging sexually harassing conduct during her employment. (See generally Mot. 22 Dismiss (“Mot.”), ECF No. 41.) Defendants also move to modify the scheduling 23 order to extend the deadline to hear motions to amend the pleadings or add parties. 24 (See generally Mot. Order Modifying Scheduling Order (“Mot. Modify”), ECF 25 No. 51.) For the reasons that follow, the Court GRANTS Defendants’ Motion to 26 27 28 1 Dismiss with leave to amend and DENIES Defendants’ Motion for Order Modifying 2 the Scheduling Order.1 II. …