Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Rodriguez v. California Attorney General's Office

August 31, 2010

DIANA RODRIGUEZ, ET AL., PLAINTIFFS,
v.
CALIFORNIA ATTORNEY GENERAL'S OFFICE, ET AL., DEFENDANTS.



The opinion of the court was delivered by: Hon. Jay C. Gandhi United States Magistrate Judge

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER DISMISSING CIVIL RIGHTS ACTION WITH LEAVE TO FILE AN AMENDED COMPLAINT, IF ANY, WITHIN THIRTY DAYS

I. PROCEEDINGS

On October 30, 2009, plaintiffs Diana and Floyd Rodriguez (collectively, "Plaintiffs") filed a pro se civil rights complaint pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 ("Complaint"). The Complaint names two State agencies as defendants: the California Attorney General's Office and the California Department of Justice (collectively, "Defendants").*fn1

Plaintiffs' claims arise out of an incident on October 6, 2001, more than eight years ago, when agents from the Department of Justice detained Plaintiffs and confiscated various guns purportedly owned by Plaintiffs.

On February 8, 2010, Defendants filed a Motion to Dismiss ("Motion") asserting the following four grounds for dismissal:

(1) The Eleventh Amendment bars this action;

(2) the claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 fail because Defendants are not "person[s]" for purposes of liability;

(3) each claim is barred by the applicable statute of limitations; and

(4) the state law claims fail because Plaintiffs have failed to allege they are based on a statute.

On April 23, 2010, Plaintiffs filed a Response to the Motion ("Response"). On April 30, 2010, Defendants filed a Reply to the Response ("Reply").

This matter is now suitable for adjudication without oral argument. For the reasons set forth below, the Court grants the Motion with leave to file an amended complaint, if any, within 30 days.

II. SUMMARY OF PLAINTIFFS' ALLEGATIONS

Plaintiffs allege that, on October 6, 2001, they attended a gun show and displayed their collection of guns for show and sale. (Compl. at 2.) During the show, an undercover agent from the Department of Justice approached Plaintiffs with an elderly man requesting to buy a gun for the elderly man's protection. (Id.) Plaintiffs refused to sell the weapon, informing them that it was against the law and they needed to purchase the gun according to proper legal procedures. (Id.)

The agent repeatedly approached Plaintiffs throughout the day, until Plaintiffs finally agreed to sell the gun. (Compl. at 2-3.) At that time, Plaintiffs allege that they were "forcefully rushed" into a van. (Id. at 3.) After questioning, their guns were confiscated and they were released without being charged with a crime. (Id.) Plaintiffs allege that for the next seven years, they repeatedly contacted ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.