Lynn Gavin et al v. San Francisco Housing Authority et al
Filing
32
ORDER RE: SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT; DENYING MOTION TO SEAL by Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers; denying without prejudice 30 Administrative Motion to File Under Seal. (Attachments: # 1 Certificate/Proof of Service)(fs, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 2/6/2017)
1
2
3
4
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
5
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
6
7
LYNN GAVIN, ET AL.,
Case No. 16-cv-04974-YGR
Plaintiffs,
8
v.
ORDER RE: SECOND AMENDED
COMPLAINT; DENYING MOTION TO SEAL
9
10
United States District Court
Northern District of California
11
SAN FRANCISCO HOUSING AUTHORITY, ET
AL.,
Re: Dkt. Nos. 30, 31
Defendants.
12
13
By Order issued November 16, 2016 (Dkt. No. 26), the Court dismissed all claims against
14
the City and County of San Francisco and the San Francisco Housing Authority with prejudice and
15
without leave to amend. Consequently, they are no longer defendants in this case. Plaintiff was
16
also directed to serve the remaining federal defendants no later than January 16, 2017 and to file
17
the proof of service. Plaintiff failed to comply with the Court’s order.
18
By Order issued on January 25, 2017 (Dkt. No. 29), the Court gave plaintiff one final
19
opportunity to show her intent to prosecute this case and directed her to file a proof of service on
20
federal defendants by Friday, February 10, 2017. The Court warned plaintiff that it would dismiss
21
the action if she failed to file the proof of service.
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
On February 3, 2017, plaintiff instead filed a second amended complaint (Dkt. No. 31) and
a motion to file the case under seal (Dkt. No. 30). To the extent plaintiff’s second amended
complaint asserts causes of action against the City and County of San Francisco and the San
Francisco Housing Authority, those claims are DISMISSED. Plaintiff is directed to serve the second
amended complaint upon all remaining defendants by March 1, 2017. Failure to do will result in
dismissal of this action.
The Court also DENIES WITHOUT PREJUDICE plaintiff’s motion to file the second
1
amended complaint under seal pursuant to HIPPA because the Court has not identified any
2
portions that appear appropriate for sealing. Plaintiff may file a renewed motion to seal pursuant to
3
Civil L.R. 79-5. The request must be narrowly tailored to seek sealing only of sealable material,
4
and must conform with Civil L.R. 79-5(d).
5
6
7
8
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: February 6, 2017
______________________________________
YVONNE GONZALEZ ROGERS
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE
9
10
United States District Court
Northern District of California
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2
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?