Hall-Johnson
Hall-Johnson v. Golden Gate Regional Center Inc.
Opinion
trial_court Opinion
1 2 3 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 4 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 5 6 7 CARNEICE KATHRINE HALL-JOHNSON, CASE NO. 19-cv-04177-YGR
8 Plaintiff,
ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO DISMISS
9 vs. FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT WITHOUT
PREJUDICE
10 GOLDEN GATE REGIONAL CENTER INC., ET AL., Re: Dkt. No. 33 11 Defendants. 12 13 Now before the Court is a motion to dismiss plaintiff Carneice Hall-Johnson’s first 14 amended complaint (“FAC”), filed by defendants Golden Gate Regional Center, Inc. and Tessa 15 McGarvey. Having carefully considered the pleadings and papers submitted, and for the reasons 16 set forth below, the Court GRANTS defendants’ motion WITHOUT PREJUDICE.1 17 1. As an initial matter, the Court excuses plaintiff’s five-day delay in filing her 18 opposition brief. Plaintiff is a pro se litigant who, according to the FAC, lives with developmental 19 disabilities. Moreover, the instant motion was briefed during the COVID-19 public health crisis. 20 Under the circumstances, the Court will consider plaintiff’s untimely-filed opposition. 21 …