Friedman

Friedman v. Jenkins

Good Law
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaMarch 19, 20244:23-cv-05036California4,422 words

Opinion

trial_court Opinion

1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 7 JACK ARNE FRIEDMAN, Case No. 23-cv-05036-JSW

8 Plaintiff,

ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT

9 v. JENKINS' MOTION TO DISMISS;

DENYING AS MOOT MOTION TO

10 BROOKE JENKINS, et al., STRIKE; SETTING CASE

MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE

Defendants. 11 Re: Dkt. No. 17

12

13 Now before the Court for consideration is the motion to dismiss the Complaint filed by 14 Defendant Brooke Jenkins. The Court has considered the parties’ papers and relevant legal 15 authority, and it finds this matter suitable for disposition without oral argument. See N.D. Civ. 16 L.R. 7-1(b). For the following reasons, the Court GRANTS the motion to dismiss, with leave to 17 amend. 18 BACKGROUND 19 Plaintiff Jack Arne Friedman was previously employed as an investigator by the Office of 20 the San Francisco District Attorney, Independent Investigations Bureau. (Dkt. No. 1, Compl., ¶ 21 10.) In that role, Plaintiff investigated officer-involved shootings and recommended whether 22 …

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.