Avenmarg

1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 EUREKA DIVISION 7 8 DEBRA AVENMARG, Case No. 19-cv-05891-RMI

9 Plaintiff,

ORDER ON MOTIONS TO DISMISS

10 v. Re: Dkt. Nos. 44, 45, 46 11 HUMBOLDT COUNTY, et al., 12 Defendants.

13 14 Now pending before the court is Defendant Humboldt County’s (“Defendant County”) 15 Second Motion to Dismiss (dkt. 44), which Defendant Blanck joined (dkt. 45), seeking dismissal 16 of Plaintiff’s First Amended Complaint (“FAC”) (dkt. 43) without further leave to amend, and 17 Defendant Blanck’s Motion (dkt. 46) seeking dismissal of Plaintiff’s Sixth Claim. Plaintiff has 18 responded (dkts. 47, 48), and Defendants have replied (dkt. 50, 52). For the reasons stated below, 19 Defendants’ Motion (dkt. 44) is granted in part and denied in part, and Defendant Blanck’s Motion 20 (dkt. 46) is granted. 21 BACKGROUND 22 Plaintiff filed an original complaint against Jeffrey Blanck, counsel for Humboldt County, 23 and Humboldt County itself, for violating…