Lam et al v. City and County of San Francisco et al
ORDER by Judge Hamilton Granting 112 Motion to Dismiss (pjhlc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 4/21/2010)
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 v. CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO, et al., Defendant(s). _______________________________/ Defendants' motion to dismiss certain claims of plaintiffs' third amended complaint ("TAC") was before the court for hearing on April 21, 2010. Evgenii Sverdlov appeared for plaintiffs and Lauren Monson appeared for defendants. The court having reviewed the parties' papers and heard their arguments, hereby GRANTS the motion for the reasons stated on the record. Accordingly, the second, third and fourth causes of action of the TAC asserting § 1981 violations are DISMISSED. Because plaintiffs have already had three opportunities to amend their complaint and because they argue no additional facts that would make these claims viable under the court's interpretation of the relevant precedent, the dismissal is with prejudice. A case management conference will be held to establish a pretrial schedule on May 27, 2010 at 2:00 p.m. along with the severed but related case number C 10-0752 PJH. IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: April 21, 2010 ______________________________ PHYLLIS J. HAMILTON United States District Judge ALFRED LAM, et al., Plaintiff(s), No. C 08-4702 PJH ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO DISMISS UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
United United States District Court
For the Northern District of California
12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?