Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_09-cv-01466/USCOURTS-caed-1_09-cv-01466-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 446
Nature of Suit: Americans with Disabilities Act - Other
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

ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS

-1-

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

FRESNO DIVISION

MARIA G. HERRERA, an individual,

Plaintiff,

v.

THOMAS GIAMPIETRO, an individual; 

ROSEMARY MONTEMAYOR, an 

individual; MONSON-SULTANA JOINT 

UNION ELEMENTARY SCHOOL 

DISTRICT; and DOES 1-50, inclusive,

Defendants.

No. 1:09-cv-1466-OWW-GSA

ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND 

DENYING IN PART DEFENDANTS’ 

MOTION TO DISMISS

Judge: Hon. Oliver W. Wanger

Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss and Motion to Strike Plaintiff’s First Amended 

Complaint (“Motion”) came on for hearing in this Court on May 3, 2010. The Court, having 

reviewed and considered the Motion, Plaintiff’s opposition and Defendants’ reply brief and 

arguments of counsel at the hearing, issued a Memorandum of Decision on Defendants’ 

Motion to Dismiss and Motion to Strike the First Amended Complaint on May 10, 2010, 

which is attached hereto as Exhibit A. Based on this Memorandum of Decision, the Court 

Case 1:09-cv-01466-OWW -SKO Document 28 Filed 05/19/10 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

ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS

-2-

HEREBY ORDERS AS FOLLOWS:

1. Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff’s Fourth Claim for Relief for violation 

of 42 U.S.C. Section 1983 and Fifth Claim for Relief for violation of 42 U.S.C. Section 1986 

is GRANTED without prejudice;

2. Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff’s First Claim for Relief for violation of 

the Americans with Disabilities Act is DENIED;

3. Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff’s Sixth Claim for Relief for violation of 

California Civil Code Section 51 is DENIED;

4. Defendant’s Motion to Strike Plaintiff’s prayer for declaratory and injunctive 

relief is GRANTED; 

5. Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss all Plaintiff’s claims to the extent that they are 

based on allegations and injuries related to the transfer of D.H. and Defendants’ Motion to 

Strike paragraphs 86-89 and references to the transfer from paragraphs 6, 100 and 136 are 

DENIED.

Plaintiff shall have fifteen (15) days from the filing of the order to file an amended 

complaint. Defendants shall file a response within fifteen (15) days of receipt of the 

amended complaint.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: May 19, 2010 /s/ Oliver W. Wanger 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE DEAC_Signature-END:

emm0d64h

Case 1:09-cv-01466-OWW -SKO Document 28 Filed 05/19/10 Page 2 of 2