McCloskey
McCloskey v. Humboldt County Sheriff's Department
Opinion
Trial Court Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA EUREKA DIVISION 7 ALLEN D. MCCLOSKEY, et al., Case No. 23-cv-01699-RMI
Plaintiffs,
ORDER ON DEFENDANTS’ MOTION
v. TO DISMISS
HUMBOLDT COUNTY SHERIFF'S Re: Dkt. No. 25 DEPARTMENT, et al., 12 Defendants. 13 Now pending before the court is Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss (dkt. 25) Plaintiffs’ First Amended Complaint (“FAC”) (dkt. 22). Plaintiffs have filed a response in opposition (dkt. 27), and Defendants have filed a reply (dkt. 30). Additionally, after the filing of Defendants’ dismissal motion, Plaintiffs submitted a request (dkt. 26) to file a voluminous “confidential” supplement to the FAC, under seal, spanning approximately 320-pages. Defendants have filed a response (dkt. 29) opposing Plaintiffs’ request to supplement. Plaintiffs then filed a request (dkt. 32) seeking to supplement the FAC, for which Defendants have also filed a response in opposition (dkt. 33). These matters having been fully briefed, as set…