Sikking
Sikking v. Housing of Urban Development (HUD)
Opinion
Trial Court Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 JEFF SIKKING, et al. Case No.: 19CV1004-LAB (KSC)
Plaintiffs,
ORDER GRANTING IN PART
v. MOTIONS TO DISMISS; AND
RICHARDSON C. GRISWOLD, et
ORDER DISMISSING CLAIMS
al. FOR LACK OF STANDING Defendants. 16 [DOCKET NUMBERS 30, 32.]
18 19 Defendant filed two motions (Docket nos. 30, 32) to dismiss the second amended complaint (“SAC”) (Docket no. 27). When Plaintiffs submitted what appeared to be multiple oppositions to each motion, the Court issued an order requiring them to file a single written opposition. (See Docket no. 51.) The Court also pointed out that the oppositions they had filed up to that point were inadequate, and if allowed to stand as Plaintiffs’ opposition, the motions would be granted. Plaintiffs filed a new opposition (Docket no. 59), which the Court accepts as their opposition to the motions to dismiss. The motions are fully briefed and ready for…