1 CESAR AUGUSTO PARDO-PENA

2 P.O. Box 4784

Valley Village, California 91617
3
818-481-0487
4 prdcsr@yahoo.com
5 In Propia Persona
6
7
8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9 FOR THE CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA - WESTERN DIVISION
10
11 CESAR PARDO-PENA, Case No.2:23-cv-06197 SPG(MRWx)
12 Plaintiff, DECLARATION IN SUPPORT OF
OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANTS’
13
MOTION TO DISMISS
14 V

15 KAAS PROPERTIES LLC,

16 ROLAND K. TELLIS,
PINNACLE PROPERTY MANAGEMENT,
17 CANDICE AVILA
18 Defendants,

19 Date: November 29, 2023

20 Courtroom: 5C
21 Time: 1:30 p.m.

22
23
24
25
26
27
28

1
DECLARATION IN SUPPORT OF
OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS
1 I, Cesar Pardo-Pena, declare as follows:
2
1. I am the Plaintiff in this action. If called as a witness, I could
3
4 and would competently testify thereto.

5 2. My complaint gives fair notice and states facially plausible claims for
6
relief for hostile housing environment, tenant on tenant harassment, landlord
7
8 on tenant harassment, retaliation for exerting his rights as a tenant, a
9
pattern or practice of discrimination, and a denial of rights to a group of
10
persons under the FHA.
11
12 3. Specifically, the substantive provisions of the FHA that I claim that
13
the Defendants allegedly violated through their actions, are that First, the
14
15 Defendants violated 42 U.S.C. § 3604(b) by discriminating in the “terms,

16 conditions, or privileges of the rental of dwellings, or in the provision of

17
services of facilities in connection therewith, because of Plaintiff’s disability .
18
19 . . .” Compl. ¶ 33(a) line 28, lines 1-6.
20
4. Second, the complaint alleges that the Defendants violated 42 U.S.C.
21
§ 3604(c), “made statements with respect to the rental of dwellings that
22
23 indicate a preference, limitation, or discrimination based a disability…” Id. ¶
24
33(b) page 13, lines 7-10.
25
26 5. Third, the complaint alleges that the Defendants violated 42 U.S.C. §

27 3617, “[c]oerced, intimidated, threatened, or interfered with persons in the

28

2
DECLARATION IN SUPPORT OF
OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS
 1 exercise or enjoyment of, or on account of their having exercised or enjoyed,
2
their rights .. .in violation of 42 U.S.C.§ 3617." Id. ,r 33(c) lines 14-21.
3
4 6. I assert that my complaint satisfies the pleading standard imposed by
5 Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8(a), as interpreted by the Supreme Court's
6
decisions in Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S.544 (2007), and Ashcroft
7
8 v. Iqbal, 556 U.S.662 (2009), which require that "a complaint must contain
9
sufficient factual matter [which], accepted as true, ...'state a claim to relief
10
that is plausible on its face."' Id.at 678 (quoting Twombly, 550 U.S.at 570).
11
12 7. I further assert that my actual allegations give the Defendants fair
13
notice of the contours of Plaintiffs claims under 42 U.S.C.§§ 3604(b)-(c), and
14
15 3617, and state claims to relief that are facially plausible.
16 8. It is for the aforementioned reasons stated, that I respectfully ask
17
This Court to deny Defendants' Motion To Dismiss pursuant to
18
19 Fed.R.Civ.Proc.12(b)(6).
20
21
I, declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct.
22
23 Executed on November 08, 2023, in Sherman Oaks, Ia.
24
25
26 In Propia Persona
27
28

3
DECLARATION IN SUPPORT OF
OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS