From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Gomez v. Hendry

United States District Court, Northern District of California
May 26, 2022
4:21-cv-09515-KAW (N.D. Cal. May. 26, 2022)

Opinion

4:21-cv-09515-KAW

05-26-2022

ANDRES GOMEZ, Plaintiff, v. GEORGE ORR HENDRY, Defendant.


ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE RELIEF

Re: Dkt. No. 23

KANDIS A. WESTMORE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

On May 9, 2022, Defendant filed a motion for administrative relief asking the undersigned to issue an order to show cause to Plaintiff to explain why subject matter jurisdiction exists and why the Court should exercise supplemental jurisdiction over the Unruh Act claim. (Def.'s Mot., Dkt. No. 23.) Pursuant to Civil Local Rule 7-11(b) Plaintiff's response was due by May 13, 2022. On May 16, 2022, Plaintiff filed an untimely opposition. (Pl.'s Opp'n, Dkt. No. 25.)

Notwithstanding, the Court DENIES Defendant's administrative motion. Defendant is free to file a formal motion to dismiss under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1) for lack of subject matter jurisdiction at any time. Upon a cursory review of the complaint, however, Defendant is advised that Plaintiff appears to allege sufficient injury to satisfy jurisdictional requirements under the ADA.

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Gomez v. Hendry

United States District Court, Northern District of California
May 26, 2022
4:21-cv-09515-KAW (N.D. Cal. May. 26, 2022)
Case details for

Gomez v. Hendry

Case Details

Full title:ANDRES GOMEZ, Plaintiff, v. GEORGE ORR HENDRY, Defendant.

Court:United States District Court, Northern District of California

Date published: May 26, 2022

Citations

4:21-cv-09515-KAW (N.D. Cal. May. 26, 2022)