Mendelson

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

FELIX MENDELSON, Case No. 20-cv-05696-AGT

Plaintiff,

ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO

v. DISMISS FOLLOWING REMAND

SAN MATEO COUNTY, Re: Dkt. No. 11 Defendant.

The Ninth Circuit remanded this case so this Court could reevaluate the County’s mo- tion to dismiss in light of Pakdel v. City and County of San Francisco, 141 S. Ct. 2226 (2021). Having considered Pakdel, the Court concludes that even under that intervening decision, the plaintiff’s claims, a Fifth Amendment takings claim and a Fourth Amendment seizure claim, are unripe. The Court therefore reaffirms its decision to grant the County’s motion to dismiss. A. The Fifth Amendment Takings Claim Before Pakdel, precedent made clear that a property owner couldn’t pursue a takings claim until the property owner submitted at least “one meaningful development proposal,” and the local land-use authority issued a final decision on that proposal. S. Pac. Transp. Co. v. City of L.A., 922 F.2d 498, 504 (9th Cir. 1990); accord Guatay Christian Fellowship v. Cnty. of San Diego, 670 F.3d 957, 982 (9th Cir. 2011). The…