Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

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

Bruce Boston v. Kamala D. Harris

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN JOSE DIVISION


August 11, 2011

BRUCE BOSTON,
PLAINTIFF,
v.
KAMALA D. HARRIS, IN HER OFFICIAL CAPACITY AS ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CALIFORNIA,
DEFENDANT.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Howard R. Lloyd United States Magistrate Judge

** E-filed August 11, 2011 **

NOT FOR CITATION

ORDER (1) DENYING AS MOOT PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO ESTABLISH EFFECTIVE DATE OF SERVICE AND (2) DENYING PLAINTIFF'S REQUEST FOR ACCESS TO COURT LIBRARY [Re: Docket Nos. 8, 9]

United States District Court For the Northern District of California

Pro se plaintiff Bruce Boston ("Boston") filed this complaint against Kamala Harris ("Harris") in her official capacity as Attorney General of California, challenging the 19 constitutionality of state laws that prohibit the use of headphones while driving a motor vehicle or 20 bicycle. On April 19, 2011 Boston attempted to serve process upon Harris by mail, in accordance 21 with California Code of Civil Procedure section 415.30, but his attempt failed.*fn1 See Docket No. 7 ("Order Following July 12, 2011 Case Management Conference").

On July 25, 2011, plaintiff Bruce Boston ("Boston") filed a motion seeking an order establishing the effective date of the service of the complaint and summons on defendant Kamala Harris ("Harris"). Docket No. 8. However, on August 8, 2011, Harris responded that she had accepted personally service of process on July 29, 2011. Docket No. 10. Accordingly, Boston's 2 motion is DENIED AS MOOT. Harris has until August 19, 2011 to answer or otherwise respond to Boston's complaint. FED. R.CIV. P. 12(a)(1)(A)(i).

Boston also filed a motion for access to this Court's law library. Docket No. 9. This Court previously denied Boston's earlier request for such access. Docket No. 7 at 2. In doing so, it 6 explained that the Santa Clara County Law Library, which is located only a few blocks away from 7 this Court's library at 360 North 1st Street, San Jose, California, 95113-1004, is open to the public 8 for longer hours and on more days than this Court's library is, and has onsite computer access (and 9 this Court's library does not). See Santa Clara County Law Library, http://sccll.org/ (last visited July 14, 2011). Boston again has presented no persuasive, applicable argument why the Santa ClaraCounty Law Library does not suffice. His motion is DENIED.

United States District Court For the Northern District of California

IT IS SO ORDERED.

C11-01873 HRL Notice will be electronically mailed to:

Anthony Paul O'Brien anthony.obrien@doj.ca.gov Notice will be mailed to:

Bruce Boston 19053 Stevens Creek Boulevard Suite 220 Cupertino, CA 95014

Counsel are responsible for distributing copies of this document to co-counsel who have not registered for e-filing under the court's CM/ECF program.

United States District Court For the Northern District of California


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

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