CA Coastkeeper Alliance v. Cosumnes Corp.

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaMay 6, 20242:20-cv-01703California976 words

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 CALIFORNIA COASTKEEPER No. 2:20-cv-1703 DB

ALLIANCE,

12 13 Plaintiff, ORDER 14 v. 15 COSUMNES CORPORATION dba

MURIETA EQUESTRIAN CENTER,

16 17 Defendant. 18 19 Each of the parties in the above-captioned case has consented to proceed before a United 20 States Magistrate Judge. See U.S.C. § 636(c). Accordingly, this matter has been reassigned to 21 the undersigned for all purposes. On April 5, 2024, plaintiff filed a motion for leave to file a third 22 amended complaint and noticed the motion for hearing on May 10, 2024. (ECF No. 113.) On 23 April 5, 2024, plaintiff filed a notice of request to seal. (ECF No. 114.) On April 12, 2024, 24 plaintiff filed a motion for summary judgment. (ECF No. 115.) On April 19, 2024, plaintiff filed 25 a motion in limine to exclude expert testimony. (ECF No. 118.) Plaintiff’s motion for summary 26 judgment and motion in limine are noticed for hearing on May 24, 2024. (ECF Nos. 118 & 122.) 27 On May 2, 2024, plaintiff filed a…

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.