Alba v. County of Tulare, California et al

Filing 21

ORDER on Defendants' Motion to Dismiss, document 10 . Defendants' Motion to Dismiss came on for hearing on March 11, 2016. At the hearing, Plaintiff made an oral motion to amend the Complaint under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15 to i nclude additional allegations about the validity and contents of the search warrant. Defendants did not oppose the motion, provided that Plaintiff had a good faith belief in the truth of his new allegations. Based on Defendants' statement of non -opposition, the Court GRANTS Plaintiff leave to amend the Complaint. Plaintiff shall file his first amended complaint no later than April 11, 2016. Any responsive pleading by Defendants shall be filed in conformance with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15. Defendants' Motion to Dismiss is, therefore, DENIED AS MOOT. Order signed by Magistrate Judge Erica P. Grosjean on 3/11/2016. (Rooney, M)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19

Case No. 1:15-cv-01492-EPG

DENNIS ALBA,
Plaintiff,
v.
RONALD CROUCH; DERRICK HOOD;
TORRES; BERTOLDO; and TULARE
COUNTY SHERIFF’S DEPARTMENT,

ORDER AFTER HEARING ON
DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS
(ECF No. 10)

Defendants.
On October 1, 2015, Dennis Alba (“Plaintiff”) filed a Complaint against Defendants
Ronald Crouch, Derrick Hood, Torres, Bertoldo, and the Tulare County Sheriff’s Department
(“Defendants”). (ECF No. 1.) The Complaint alleges that Defendants executed a search warrant

20
on property, including a residential travel trailer, where Plaintiff was residing. Plaintiff alleges
21
that the search warrant did not authorize Defendants to search the travel trailer. On February 1,
22
2016, Defendants filed a Motion to Dismiss the Complaint under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure
23
12(b)(6). (ECF No. 10.)
24

Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss came on for hearing on March 11, 2016 at 9:00 a.m. All

25
parties appeared through counsel telephonically. At the hearing, Plaintiff made an oral motion to
26
amend the Complaint under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15 to include additional allegations
27
about the validity and contents of the search warrant. Defendants did not oppose the motion,
28
1

1

provided that Plaintiff had a good faith belief in the truth of his new allegations. Based on

2

Defendants’ statement of non-opposition, the Court GRANTS Plaintiff leave to amend the

3

Complaint. Plaintiff shall file his first amended complaint no later than April 11, 2016. Any

4

responsive pleading by Defendants shall be filed in conformance with Federal Rule of Civil

5

Procedure 15. Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 10) is thus DENIED AS MOOT.

6
7
8

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

March 11, 2016

/s/
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2