(PS) Roberts v. Sacramento Housing & Redevelopment Agency

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 SYDNEY BROOKE ROBERTS, et al., No. 2:22-cv-01699 DJC AC PS Plaintiffs, v. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS SACRAMENTO HOUSING & REDEVEOPMENT AGENCY, et al, 15 Defendants. 16 17 Pending before the undersigned is pro se plaintiffs’ motion for a temporary restraining order (ECF No. 26). Based on the analysis below, the undersigned recommends that the motion be DENIED. I. RELEVANT FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND Plaintiffs, proceeding in forma pauperis (“IFP”) pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(1), filed this case on September 27, 2022. ECF No. 1. Pursuant to the screening process associated with IFP status, their initial complaint was rejected and plaintiffs were given multiple opportunities to amend their complaint; ultimately plaintiffs’ Third Amended Complaint (“TAC”) was approved for service. ECF Nos. 3, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 11 (TAC). Defendants moved to dismiss on April 14, 2023. ECF No. 21. That motion is set to be heard on May…