Lindblad

Lindblad v. Bolanos

Good Law
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaJuly 4, 20223:21-cv-06606California6,871 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 ROBERT MICHAEL LINDBLAD, Case No. 21-cv-06606-SI

Plaintiff,

ORDER OF DISMISSAL AND ORDER

v. ON PENDING MOTIONS

CARLOS G. BOLANOS, et al., Re: Dkt. No. 59, 76, 77, 81 Defendants.

12 Before the Court is a motion to dismiss the First Amended Complaint (“FAC”) filed by defendants San Mateo County, Jennifer Stalzer, Sheriff Carlos G. Bolanos, Deputy Andrew Constantino, Deputy Ron Azar, Deputy Jimmy Chung, and Deputy Homing Cheung (“County Defendants”) pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6). Dkt. No. 77. The FAC also names as defendants City of Millbrae, the County Commission of San Mateo County, and Safeway Grocery Outlet. Id. Although these additional defendants have not filed a motion to dismiss, the Court will contemporaneously evaluate, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2), whether the FAC is legally viable as to the County Defendants as well as the additional defendants. As explained further…

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.