Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_14-cv-01424/USCOURTS-caed-2_14-cv-01424-2/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 440
Nature of Suit: Other Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 28:1441 Petition for Removal- Civil Rights 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

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

CHESTER MARK SOMERA,

Plaintiff,

v.

COUNTY OF SAN JOAQUIN; 

MICHAEL ARREOLA; CHRIS 

STIEHR; CHRIS TUNQUIST; 

NELIDA STONE; JANET LEE 

BARTON; CLAUDE PURKIS; BRENT 

MANGHAM; MARK BUTLER; and 

DOES 1 through 30, inclusive,

Defendants.

No. 2:14-CV-1424-GEB-AC 

ORDER DENYING MOTION TO STRIKE 

PORTIONS OF FIRST AMENDED 

COMPLAINT

Defendants Mangham and Butler move under Federal Rule

of Civil Procedure (“Rule”) 12(f) for an order striking the

portions of Plaintiff’s First Amended Complaint sounding in state 

law notwithstanding Plaintiff’s characterization of his claims as 

federal claims alleged under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. However, the 

movants have not shown that the motion is authorized by Rule 

12(f); therefore, the motion is denied. See generally

Whittlestone, Inc. v. Handi-Craft Co., 618 F.3d 970, 976 (9th 

Case 2:14-cv-01424-KJM-AC Document 27 Filed 01/14/15 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

Cir. 2010)(“hold[ing] that Rule 12(f) . . . does not authorize a 

district court to dismiss a claim for damages on the basis it is 

precluded as a matter of law.”).

Dated: January 14, 2015

Case 2:14-cv-01424-KJM-AC Document 27 Filed 01/14/15 Page 2 of 2