Plaintiffs Aschilew Jember, Ferede Negash and Leilti Mesfin (collectively, “Plaintiffs”) move to “strike the notice of Suspension business license of Lunch Box Restaurant… and cease acts of retaliation against Plaintiffs by Defendants. Plaintiffs’ complaint alleges that, in May 2003, the State of California’s Board of Equalization conspired with gangs and members of the KKK to “collect racial hate crime service fees” and “manufacture bogus tax liability” allowing the Board to claim $385,000 in fraudulent tax liability against Plaintiffs as owners of the Lunch Box Restaurant. On February 27, 2014, the Court [Hon. Yew] sustained the demurrer of the State of California, by and through the Board of Equalization (“State”), Bryan Dang (“Dang”), Betty Yee (“Yee”), George Runner (“Runner”), Michelle Steele (“Steele”), Jerome Horton (“Horton”) and John Chiang’s (“Chiang”) (collectively, “Defendants”), granting 10 days leave to amend the complaint.
Plaintiffs attach to their motion the “notice of suspension” from the Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control, a January 22, 2014 letter sent to a “Lielti M. Desta.” It is unclear as to whether Ms. Mesfin is, in fact, Ms. Desta. Nevertheless, Plaintiffs’ motion is without basis. A motion to strike is limited to the striking of a pleading, which is defined by Code of Civil Procedure section 435 to be a complaint, cross-complaint, demurrer or answer. (See Code Civ. Proc. § 435, subds. (a)(1)-(2), (b)(1)-(3).) The notice of suspension does not qualify as a pleading pursuant to section 435. Defendants also make other arguments with which the Court agrees. Plaintiff’s motion to strike is DENIED.