Patterson

Patterson v. Six Flags Theme Parks Inc.

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaMay 9, 20242:21-cv-02398California2,601 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 Melvin Patterson, No. 2:21-cv-02398-KJM-AC Plaintiff, ORDER v. Six Flags Theme Parks Incorporated, et al., 1S Defendants. 16 In this disability discrimination action, the court has set a bench trial for September 24, 2024. In advance of the trial, plaintiff has filed a motion in limine to exclude defendants’ expert 19 testimony. The court takes the matter under submission without holding a hearing and for the 20 reasons below, grants the motion. I. BACKGROUND Plaintiff Melvin Patterson is deaf. First Am. Compl. (FAC) § 1, ECF No. 27. He brings 23 this action under Title III of the Americans with Disabilities Act and the California Unruh Civil Rights Act against defendants Six Flags Theme Parks, Inc., Six Flags Entertainment Corp., and Park Management Corp. (collectively, defendants). See id. 11-13, 70-91. Plaintiff alleges defendants discriminated against him…

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.