Khan v. City of Lodi
Plaintiff: Muddsar Khan
Defendant: City of Lodi
Case Number: 2:2017cv02169
Filed: October 18, 2017
Court: US District Court for the Eastern District of California
Office: Sacramento Office
County: San Joaquin
Presiding Judge: Gregory G. Hollows
Presiding Judge: Morrison C. England
Nature of Suit: Other Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983
Jury Demanded By: Plaintiff
RSS Follow case documents by RSS

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed Document Text
April 27, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 70 STIPULATION and ORDER signed by Senior Judge Morrison C. England, Jr., on 4/26/21 DISMISSING this action with prejudice. CASE CLOSED (Kastilahn, A)
March 29, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 68 ORDER signed by Senior Judge Morrison C. England, Jr on 3/29/2021 GRANTING Defendants' 60 Motion to Dismiss. This Court DISMISSES all nine state law claims (the Second through Tenth Causes of Action), the claim for municipal liability under Monell against Defendant City of Lodi as stated in the First Cause of Action, and any other civil rights claim asserted within the First Cause of Action with the exception of false arrest. Defendant Hitchcock is hereby ORDERED to file an answer to Plaintiff's remaining constitutional false arrest claim pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, as stated in the First Cause of Action, within thirty days of the electronic filing of this Order. (Zignago, K.)
July 21, 2020 Opinion or Order Filing 65 ORDER signed by Senior Judge Morrison C. England, Jr on 7/21/2020 GRANTING 62 Motion to Continue, CONTINUING the Motion Hearing to 9/1/2020 at 02:00 PM in Courtroom 7 (MCE) before Senior Judge Morrison C. England Jr. for briefing purposes with any Opposition due by 8/18/2020 and any Reply due by 8/25/2020. Because the Motion has already been submitted by 61 Minute Order, no hearing will be held. (Coll, A)
May 20, 2020 Opinion or Order Filing 56 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER signed by Senior Judge Morrison C. England, Jr on 5/19/2020 GRANTING 46 Motion to Dismiss as follows: Plaintiff's First Count is dismissed, to the extent it states any claim predicated on excessive force, with leave to amend. Plaintiff's Second Count is dismissed, with leave to amend; Given Plaintiff's stated withdrawal of both his Third and Twelfth Counts, those Counts are dismissed, without further leave to amend; Plaintiff's Fourth through Eleve nth Counts are dismissed for failure to comply with the California Tort Claims Act, with leave to amend. If Plaintiff desires to file a Fourth Amended Complaint, he is directed to do so not later than twenty (20) days following the date this Memorandum and Order is electronically filed. If no further amended complaint is filed in said twenty (20) days, this action will be dismissed with no further notice to the parties. (Mena-Sanchez, L)
February 7, 2019 Opinion or Order Filing 25 ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Allison Claire on 2/6/19 DIRECTING plaintiff to SHOW CAUSE in writing within 14 days why his failure to submit a timely status report should not result in a recommendation that this case be dismissed for failure to prosecute. The filing a status report within this timeframe will serve as cause and will discharge this order. (Coll, A)
May 11, 2018 Opinion or Order Filing 18 ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Gregory G. Hollows on 5/11/18 ORDERING that Plaintiff's Motion to Amend 16 is GRANTED. Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint is now the operative complaint of record in this action. (Mena-Sanchez, L)
April 12, 2018 Opinion or Order Filing 15 ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Gregory G. Hollows on 4/11/18 ORDERING that Plaintiff shall have an unspecified amount of time to effect service of the complaint on the condition that he notify the court 60 days from the date of this Order, and every 60 days thereafter, of the status of his pending state action; Plaintiff is warned that failure to provide the notices required above may result in a recommendation that this matter be dismissed with prejudice. (Becknal, R)
March 14, 2018 Opinion or Order Filing 13 ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Gregory G. Hollows on 3/14/18 ORDERING that Plaintiff's duty to serve his amended complaint in this matter is hereby further EXTENDED for a period of 30 days from the date of this Order. Plaintiff must return an executed service of complaint and summons prior to the expiration of the extended service period, or move the court for an indefinite stay satisfying the requirements set forth above. (Mena-Sanchez, L)
February 13, 2018 Opinion or Order Filing 7 ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Gregory G. Hollows on 2/12/2018 DIRECTING the Clerk of Court to add M. Hitchcock, Officer as the first named defendant in the caption to the Amended Complaint and to issue forthwith all process. Within 14 days from the date of this order, plaintiff shall submit to the USM the necessary documents and file a statement with the court. The USM shall serve process without prepayment of costs within 90 days. In the event the USM is unable, for any reason wh atsoever, to effectuate service on any defendant within 90 days from the date of this order, the Marshal is DIRECTED to report that fact, and the reasons for it, to the undersigned. The Clerk of Court shall serve a copy of this order on the USM. (York, M)
October 23, 2017 Opinion or Order Filing 3 ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Gregory G. Hollows on 10/23/17 ORDERING that Plaintiff's Request to proceed with his action informa puaperis 2 is GRANTED; Plaintiff's complaint is DISMISSED with leave to amend to conform to the standa rds set out in this Order within 30 days of the filing of the Order. Plaintiff is warned that the failure timely to file an amended complaint, or the filing of such an amended complaint that does not meet the requirements laid out in this Order, may result in a recommendation that his complaint be dismissed with prejudice. (Mena-Sanchez, L)
Access additional case information on PACER

Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.

Access this case on the California Eastern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Khan v. City of Lodi
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Muddsar Khan
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: City of Lodi
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?