Booth

Booth v. Feinberg

Good Law
United States District Court, Southern District of CaliforniaAugust 27, 20213:21-cv-01216California664 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 TAMMY MAE BOOTH, Case No. 21-cv-01216-BAS-WVG

Plaintiff,

ORDER GRANTING THE

v. UNOPPOSED MOTION TO DISMISS

BY DEFENDANTS MARK D.

JEAN M. HEINZ, et al.,

FEINBERG, JEAN M. HEINZ,

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

17 18 19 20 21 22 For the third time, Plaintiff Tammy Mae Both brings an action seeking monetary damages from Defendants Mark D. Feinberg, Jean M. Heinz, Heinz & Feinberg Attorneys at Law. (ECF No. 1.) Her two previous actions were dismissed without prejudice, each time because of her noncompliance with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and Local Civil Rule. (Order, Booth v. Kane et al., 3:20-cv-02543-GPC-KSC, ECF No. 8; Order, Booth v. Feinberg et al., 3:21-cv-01216-BAS-WVG, ECF No. 5.) On July 6, 2021, Booth filed the present action against Defendants, raising copyright infringement claims that are substantially identical to the ones raised before. On…

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.