From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Ho v. City of Long Beach Pub. Works

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Feb 10, 2020
Case No. 2:19-cv-09430-DOC-KES (C.D. Cal. Feb. 10, 2020)

Opinion

Case No. 2:19-cv-09430-DOC-KES

02-10-2020

VIENPHUONG TI HO, Plaintiff, v. THE CITY OF LONG BEACH PUBLIC WORKS, et al., Defendants.


ORDER ACCEPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636, the Court has reviewed the pleadings and all the records and files herein, along with the Report and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge. Further, the Court has engaged in a de novo review of those portions of the Report and Recommendation to which objections have been made. (Dkt. 40, 45.) The Court accepts the findings, conclusions, and recommendations of the United States Magistrate Judge.

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that:

1. Defendants' motions to dismiss for failure to state a claim (Dkt. 22, 23, 25) are granted in part and denied in part;

2. The anti-SLAPP motion filed by Defendants Oum, Pho, and Roshanian is denied without prejudice;

3. Claim 1 (as to Defendants Oum, Pho, and Roshanian), Claim 5, and Claim 8 of the Complaint are dismissed with prejudice and without leave to amend;

4. Claim 1 (as to the other Defendants), Claim 2, Claim 3, and Claim 4 of the Complaint are dismissed without prejudice and with leave to amend;

5. Leave to amend is limited to adding facts supporting the claims pled in the initial Complaint, and it does not include leave to add new Defendants or claims; and

To the extent Plaintiff objects that she should be allowed to amend the Complaint to bring a new state-law claim against new defendant(s) for an "illegal eviction" that occurred on November 1, 2019 (Dkt. 45 at 2, 5, 9-11), the Court denies such leave at present. Plaintiff must first state a valid basis for relief under federal law to properly invoke this Court's subject matter jurisdiction. If she does so, she may later seek leave to amend to add new state-law claims, which the Court may decide to reach under supplemental jurisdiction. See 28 U.S.C. § 1367. --------

6. Plaintiff shall file a First Amended Complaint within thirty (30) days of the date of this order. DATED: Feb 10, 2020

/s/_________

DAVID O. CARTER

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE


Summaries of

Ho v. City of Long Beach Pub. Works

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Feb 10, 2020
Case No. 2:19-cv-09430-DOC-KES (C.D. Cal. Feb. 10, 2020)
Case details for

Ho v. City of Long Beach Pub. Works

Case Details

Full title:VIENPHUONG TI HO, Plaintiff, v. THE CITY OF LONG BEACH PUBLIC WORKS, et…

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Date published: Feb 10, 2020

Citations

Case No. 2:19-cv-09430-DOC-KES (C.D. Cal. Feb. 10, 2020)