CA9: Motel operator in Los Angeles fails to state Patel claim

Plaintiff’s second amended complaint didn’t state a City of Los Angeles v. Patel claim. “The SAC’s allegation that the Motel’s registration records were searched pursuant to a CUP condition that was imposed by a vote of the City Council provides a basis for municipal liability based on this ‘expressly adopted official policy’ and this ‘decision of a “final policymaker.”’ Ellins, 710 F.3d at 1066 (citation omitted). However, the SAC lacks specific facts that would allow an inference or conclusion that the City’s conduct violated the Constitution. The SAC is silent as to the specific circumstances of the searches, when the searches occurred, or whether Appellants had access to precompliance review. Similarly, there are no allegations as to the damages, if any, suffered by either or both Appellants for the alleged Fourth Amendment violation. Even construing the allegations in the light most favorable to Appellants, the SAC does not state a claim for violation of the Fourth Amendment under Patel with the specificity demanded by Twombly and Iqbal.” Akshar Global Invs. Corp. v. City of Los Angeles, 2020 U.S. App. LEXIS 17093 (9th Cir. May 29, 2020).

This entry was posted in Administrative search. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.