Booth

Booth v. Curiel

Good Law
United States District Court, Southern District of CaliforniaMay 17, 20213:21-cv-00469California497 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 TAMMY MAE BOOTH, Case No. 21-cv-00469-BAS-RBB

Plaintiff,

ORDER GRANTING THE

v. UNOPPOSED MOTION TO DISMISS

BY DEFENDANTS MARK D.

GONZALO P. CURIEL, et al.,

FEINBERG, JEAN M. HEINZ,

Defendants. HEINZ & FEINBERG ATTORNEYS AT LAW (ECF No. 3)

17 18 19 On March 17, 2021, Plaintiff Tammy Mae Booth filed this action against Defendants Mark D. Feinberg, Jean M. Heinz, Heinz & Feinberg Attorneys at Law (“H&F Defendants”), and United States District Judge Gonzalo P. Curiel. (ECF No. 1.) On April 7, 2021, the H&F Defendants moved to dismiss Plaintiff’s Complaint under Rule 12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, noticing May 17, 2021, as the hearing date. (ECF No. 3.) Plaintiff’s deadline to file the opposition was May 3, 2021. Civ. L.R. 7.1(e). No opposition was filed. Civil Local Rule 7.1(e)(2) provides that a party opposing a motion must file either an opposition or…

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.