(PC) Vernon v. Metropolitan Life Ins. Co.
Opinion
trial_court Opinion
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 JIMMY LEE VERNON, JR., No. 2:23-cv-01829 DJC AC PS 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 14 METROPOLITAN LIFE INSURANCE
COMPANY; KAITLYN CRAWFORD;
15 BRENDA KOLOGY; JOHN ANDJANE
DOES 1-5,
16 Defendants. 17
18 19 Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding in this matter pro se, and pre-trial proceedings are 20 accordingly referred to the undersigned pursuant to Local Rule 302(c)(21). The operative first 21 amended complaint is located at ECF No. 9. Defendants move to dismiss the case. ECF No. 18. 22 Plaintiff opposed the motion. ECF No. 23. Defendants filed a reply that was improperly noticed 23 as a motion. ECF No. 24. Plaintiff submitted a second opposition (ECF No. 25), which 24 defendants objected to as an improper surreply (ECF No. 26). In the interest of fairness and 25 judicial efficiency, the court has considered all the briefing. For the reasons explained below, the 26 undersigned recommends that defendants’ motion to dismiss be GRANTED, but that…