Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_19-cv-00593/USCOURTS-caed-2_19-cv-00593-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Steve Moore
Defendant
Christal Mosteiro
Plaintiff
San Joaquin County
Defendant
Zachary Simmons
Defendant

Document Text:

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

CHRISTAL MOSTEIRO,

Plaintiff,

v.

SAN JOAQUIN COUNTY, SHERIFF 

STEVE MOORE, ZACHARY 

SIMMONS, and DOES 1-25,

Defendants.

No. 2:19-cv-00593-MCE-DB

ORDER

Plaintiff Christal Mosteiro (“Plaintiff”) initiated this civil rights action against San 

Joaquin County (“County”), former Sheriff Steve Moore, and Sheriff’s Deputy Zachary 

Simmons (“Simmons”) (collectively, “Defendants”) seeking to recover damages resulting 

from Defendants’ alleged unconstitutional and tortious conduct. The Complaint alleges 

the following claims for relief: (1) violation of Plaintiff’s Fourteenth Amendment Rights 

pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (“§ 1983”) as to Simmons and Monell as to the County, 

and (2) violation of Plaintiff’s First Amendment Rights pursuant to § 1983 as to Simmons. 

Compl., ECF No. 1, at 5-6. Sheriff Moore is not listed under either cause of action. Id.

Presently before the Court is the County and Sheriff Moore’s Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff’s 

First Claim for Relief under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6).1 ECF No. 6. 

 

1 All further references to “Rule” or “Rules” are to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure unless 

otherwise noted.

Case 2:19-cv-00593-MCE-SCR Document 10 Filed 02/18/20 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

For the reasons set forth below, that Motion is GRANTED.2

First, Plaintiff has agreed to voluntarily dismiss her Monell claims and requests 

leave to amend. Pl.’s Opp., ECF No. 8, at 2. Therefore, the Motion is GRANTED with 

leave to amend as to this issue.

Second, the Complaint fails to specify whether Plaintiff is suing Sheriff Moore in 

his individual or official capacity, or both. In her Opposition, Plaintiff states that she is 

suing Sheriff Moore in his individual capacity under a theory of supervisory liability

because he knew or should have known Simmons was engaging in conduct alleged in 

the Complaint since numerous reports and complaints were made against Simmons. 

Pl.’s Opp., ECF No. 8, at 2. However, Plaintiff raises these allegations for the first time 

in her Opposition and thus the Court cannot consider them at this time. Therefore, 

Plaintiff’s claims against Sheriff Moore are also DISMISSED with leave to amend.

Based on the foregoing, the County and Sheriff Moore’s Motion to Dismiss

Plaintiff’s First Claim for Relief, ECF No. 6, is GRANTED with leave to amend. Plaintiff 

may, but is not required to, file an amended complaint not later than twenty (20) days 

after the date this Order is filed electronically. If no amended complaint is filed within 

said twenty (20)-day period, Plaintiff’s claims will be deemed dismissed without leave to 

amend upon no further notice to the parties.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: February 18, 2020

 

2 Because oral argument would not have been of material assistance, the Court ordered this 

matter submitted on the briefs. E.D. Local Rule 230(g).

Case 2:19-cv-00593-MCE-SCR Document 10 Filed 02/18/20 Page 2 of 2