Lori Wagner v. Copart Inc et al

Filing 50

MINUTES (IN CHAMBERS): ORDER by Magistrate Judge David T. Bristow: RE 31 Motion to Dismiss ; 44 Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction ; 46 Motion to Dismiss Case. As this Court has not yetcompleted its screening of the First Amended C omplaint, the Motions to Dismiss are hereby STAYED. In the event the Court determines the First Amended Complaint states a claim on which relief may be granted, the Court will order plaintiff to file an opposition to the Motions. Accordingly, the Motions to Dismiss [Dkt. Nos. 31, 44, 46], are hereby STAYED pending the Court's screening of the First Amended Complaint. Accordingly, the hearings noticed for March 5, 2015 and April 2, 2015, are ordered offcalendar. (dc)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
CIVIL MINUTES--GENERAL

Case No. CV 14-05569-GHK (DTB)

Date: February 25, 2015

Title: Lori Wagner v. Copart, Inc., et al.
============================================================
DOCKET ENTRY
===========================================================
PRESENT:
HON. DAVID T. BRISTOW, UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
D. Castellanos
Deputy Clerk
ATTORNEYS PRESENT FOR PLAINTIFFS:

None Present

n /a
Co urt Reporter
ATTORNEYS PRESENT FOR DEFENDANTS:

None Present

PROCEEDINGS: (IN CHAMBERS)
Defendants’ Motions to Dismiss
On January 26, 2015, defendants Copart, Inc. and Curtis Holdsworth filed a
Motion to Dismiss plaintiff’s First Amended Complaint. On February 18, 2015,
defendants Maren E. Nelson, David S. Wesley, Lee Smalley Edmon, and Kamala D.
Harris filed Motions to Dismiss plaintiff’s First Amended Complaint. In accordance
with the terms of the “Prison Litigation Reform Act of 1995,” the Court screens the First
Amended Complaint prior to ordering service for purposes of determining whether the
action is frivolous or malicious; or fails to state a claim on which relief may be granted;
or seeks monetary relief against a defendant who is immune from such relief. See 28
U.S.C. §§ 1915(e)(2), 1915A(b); 42 U.S.C. § 1997e(c)(1). As this Court has not yet
completed its screening of the First Amended Complaint, the Motions to Dismiss are
hereby STAYED. In the event the Court determines the First Amended Complaint states
a claim on which relief may be granted, the Court will order plaintiff to file an
opposition to the Motions. Accordingly, the Motions to Dismiss [Dkt. Nos. 31, 44, 46],
are hereby STAYED pending the Court’s screening of the First Amended Complaint.
Accordingly, the hearings noticed for March 5, 2015 and April 2, 2015, are ordered off
calendar.

MINUTES FORM 11
CIVIL-GEN

Initials of Deputy Clerk DC