Cortez
Cortez v. Hart
Opinion
trial_court Opinion
1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 JASON CORTEZ, Case No. 22-cv-06023 EJD (PR) 7 Plaintiff,
ORDER GRANTING
8 DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO v.
DISMISS
9
JIM HART, et al., 10 Defendants. 11 (Docket No. 20) 12 13 Plaintiff, a pretrial detainee, filed the instant pro se civil rights action pursuant to 42 14 U.S.C. § 1983 against officers at the Santa Cruz County Jail (“Jail”), where he is currently 15 confined. Dkt. No. 1. This action is proceeding solely on the excessive force claims 16 against Defendants J. Ainsworth and R. Seavers. Dkt. No. 14.1 17 Defendants filed a motion to dismiss the complaint under Federal Rule of Civil 18 Procedure 12(b)(6) because the complaint fails to state sufficient facts to state a claim and 19 they are entitled to qualified immunity. Dkt. No. 20. Plaintiff filed opposition, Dkt. No. 20 27-1, and Defendants filed a reply, Dkt. No. 28. 21 For the reasons discussed below, Defendants’ motion is GRANTED. 22 DISCUSSION 23 A. Motion to Dismiss 24 Failure to…