From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Rose v. Ciula

United States District Court, E.D. California
Feb 22, 2006
No. 2:05-cv-2232-GEB-PAN (E.D. Cal. Feb. 22, 2006)

Opinion

No. 2:05-cv-2232-GEB-PAN.

February 22, 2006.



ORDER

This motion was determined to be suitable for decision without oral argument. L.R. 78-230(h).


On January 3, 2006, Defendant Kathleen Ciula moved to dismiss Plaintiffs' second claim for relief with prejudice under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). (Mot. to Dismiss at 6.) On January 12, 2006, Plaintiffs filed a Statement of Non-Opposition which stated "Plaintiffs do not oppose [D]efendant Ciula's Motion to Dismiss [P]laintiffs' second claim for relief." (Statement of Non-Opp'n at 1.) Therefore, the Motion to Dismiss is granted; the second claim for relief in Plaintiffs' Complaint is dismissed with prejudice.

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Rose v. Ciula

United States District Court, E.D. California
Feb 22, 2006
No. 2:05-cv-2232-GEB-PAN (E.D. Cal. Feb. 22, 2006)
Case details for

Rose v. Ciula

Case Details

Full title:PETER ROSE; ASHLEY ROSE, a minor, by and through her Guardian Ad Litem…

Court:United States District Court, E.D. California

Date published: Feb 22, 2006

Citations

No. 2:05-cv-2232-GEB-PAN (E.D. Cal. Feb. 22, 2006)