Amy

Amy v. Curtis

Good Law
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaOctober 26, 20203:19-cv-02184California6,312 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

“AMY”, et al., Case No. 19-cv-02184-PJH Plaintiffs,

v. ORDER GRANTING FIRST MOTION

TO STRIKE AND DENYING SECOND

RANDALL STEVEN CURTIS, MOTION TO STRIKE Defendant. Re: Dkt. Nos. 97, 121

13 Before the court are plaintiffs’ motions to strike. Dkts. 97, 121. The matters are fully briefed and suitable for decision without oral argument. Having read the parties’ papers and carefully considered their arguments and the relevant legal authority, and good cause appearing, the court rules as follows. BACKGROUND Fifteen plaintiffs, proceeding under pseudonyms, collectively bring this civil action against defendant Randall Curtis (“defendant”) based on his criminal child pornography offenses in violation of title 18 U.S.C. § 2252. In their first amended complaint (“FAC”), plaintiffs assert a single cause of action under 18 U.S.C. § 2255(a), which allows victims of child pornography to…

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.