Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_22-cv-01699/USCOURTS-caed-2_22-cv-01699-8/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 445
Nature of Suit: Americans with Disabilities Act - Employment
Cause of Action: 42:12101 Americans with Disabilities Act

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SYDNEY BROOKE ROBERTS, et al.,

Plaintiffs,

v.

SACRAMENTO HOUSING AND 

REDEVELOPMENT AGENY, et al.,

Defendants.

No. 2:22-cv-1699 DJC AC PS

ORDER

Plaintiffs are proceeding in this action in pro per. The matter was referred to a 

United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to Local Rule 302(c)(21).

On May 31, 2023, the Magistrate Judge filed findings and recommendations 

herein which were served on all parties, and which contained notice to all parties that 

any objections to the findings and recommendations were to be filed within twentyone days. (ECF No. 36.) No party filed objections. 

In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C) and Local Rule 

304, this Court has conducted a de novo review of this case. Having carefully 

reviewed the entire file, the Court finds the findings and recommendations to be 

supported by the record and by proper analysis.

////

Case 2:22-cv-01699-DJC-AC Document 47 Filed 11/20/23 Page 1 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

2

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the findings and recommendations 

filed May 31, 2023, are adopted in full and Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss, ECF No. 

21, is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART as follows:

1. GRANTED as to defendants Darrell Steinberg, Angelique Ashby, Sean 

Lololee, Jeff Harris, Katie Valenzuela, Jay Schenirer, Eric Guerra, Rick Jennings, Mai 

Vang, Phil Serna, Rich Desmond, Sue Frost, and Don Nottoli, all of whom are

DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE;

2. GRANTED without leave to amend as to the claim for family composition 

discrimination (Claim Six), which is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE;

3. DENIED as to the remaining individual defendants, all claims against whom 

should be CONSTRUED as individual capacity claims only;

4. DENIED as to claims for disability discrimination in housing under the 

Americans with Disabilities Act, the Rehabilitation Act, and the Fair Housing Act 

(Claims One and Five);

5. DENIED as to the ineffective communication claim under the Americans with 

Disabilities Act (Claim Two);

6. DENIED as to the Fourteenth Amendment due process violation claim (Claim 

Three); and

7. DENIED as to the accessibility of services claims (Claim Four).

In addition, Plaintiffs will be granted leave to amend to include additional facts 

as outlined by the magistrate judge in the findings and recommendations within 30 

days of the entry of this order. (See ECF No. 36.) 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: November 17, 2023 

Hon. Daniel J. Calabretta

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 2:22-cv-01699-DJC-AC Document 47 Filed 11/20/23 Page 2 of 2