Mary Gustafson v. City of San Jose

Good Law
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaNovember 5, 20195:19-cv-03047California1,562 words

Opinion

trial_court Opinion

1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 SAN JOSE DIVISION 7

MARY GUSTAFSON,

8 Case No. 5:19-cv-03047-EJD Plaintiff, 9 ORDER DISMISSING PLAINTIFF’S v. CLAIMS WITH PREJUDICE 10 CITY OF SAN JOSE, et al., Re: Dkt. No. 24 11 Defendants. 12

13 On October 2, 2019, this Court issued an order addressing various questions posed by 14 Plaintiff and ordering Plaintiff to amend her complaint by November 1, 2019. Dkt. 19. As the 15 Court instructed Plaintiff, the Court’s ability to provide legal advice or aid to Plaintiff is limited. 16 The Court urged Plaintiff to bring her letter and the Court’s prior orders to Mr. Kevin Knestrick at 17 the Federal Pro Se Program so that he could help Plaintiff with her questions. 18 Plaintiff submitted an amended complaint on October 28, 2019. See Dkt. 24 (“Amended 19 Compl.”). The amended complaint still fails to state a plausible claim for relief. See Order 20 Granting IFP Application; Screening Complaint Under 28 U.S.C.…

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.