United States District Court, N.D. California
October 7, 2005.
JASON BROWNE et al., Plaintiffs,
STEVEN GOSSETT et al., Defendants.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: CHARLES BREYER, District Judge
ORDER RE MOTIONS TO DISMISS
Now pending before the Court are defendants' motions to
dismiss. As explained in open court on October 7, 2005, the Court
rules as follows:
1. The motions to dismiss the Fifth Cause of Action
(retaliatory discrimination) and the Eleventh Cause of Action
(ADA) are GRANTED with prejudice because plaintiffs have
2. The motions to dismiss the City of Arcata and Sonoma County
from the federal claims found in the First, Second, Third,
Fourth, and Sixth Causes of Action are GRANTED with prejudice
because plaintiffs concede that there is no Monell claim.
3. The motions to dismiss the patient-only plaintiffs from the
First Cause of Action is GRANTED with prejudice because those
plaintiffs Shepherd, William Browne, Snow, Lerch, Rabey, Cecil,
Neto, Burleigh, Stoops and Allen were not subject to the search
and seizure on July 18, 2002. 4. The motion to dismiss the Thirteenth Cause of Action is
GRANTED with prejudice as to the federal due process claims under
the 5th and 14th Amendments because plaintiffs' allegations are
vague and conclusory and do not state a claim.
5. The motions to dismiss the Twelfth, Seventeenth, Eighteenth,
and Twentieth Causes of Action are GRANTED with prejudice because
plaintiffs improperly added them in contradiction to this Court's
order of July 14, 2004 granting plaintiffs leave to amend the
"remaining claims against the remaining defendants."
6. The motions to dismiss the First, Second, Third, Fourth, and
Sixth Causes of Actions against individual defendants Lucas,
Gossett, and Salas are DENIED as to the federal claims only.
7. The remaining state law claims are STAYED until further
notice from the Court.
Defendants Lucas, Gossett and Salas are to submit motions for
summary judgment as to the remaining federal claims on or before
November 18, 2005. The motions will be heard on January 27, 2006.
Plaintiffs' opposition shall be filed no later than January 6,
2006, and defendants' reply shall be filed no later than January
13, 2006. Plaintiff's counsel is ordered to send a letter to
defendants' counsel requesting limited discovery by October 21,
IT IS SO ORDERED.
© 1992-2005 VersusLaw Inc.