Legal Opinion

(PC) Nedd v. Landon

District Court, E.D. California

Decided June 14, 2024No. 1:23-cv-01630Unknown

1Opinion

1 Order 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 JEFFEREY S. NEDD, Case No. 1:23-cv-01630-HBK (PC) 12 Plaintiff, ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE SUPPLEMENT TO 13 v. THIRD AMENDED COMPLAINT 14 LANDON BIRD, (Doc. No. 22) 15 Defendant 16 17 Pending before the Court is Plaintiff’s Motion For Leave to File Supplemental Complaint. 18 (Doc. No. 22, “Motion”). In it, Plaintiff seeks leave to supplement his Third Amended 19 Complaint. (See id.). The undersigned previously issued a Findings and Recommendations 20 (“F&R”) to dismiss Plaintiff’s…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Rhodes v. RobinsonCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2010
  2. Janell Howard v. City of Coos BayCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2017
  3. San Luis & Delta-Mendota Water Authority v. United States Department of the InteriorDistrict Court, E.D. California · 2006

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API