Duggan v. United States of America et al

Filing 89

ORDER Denying 51 Plaintiff's Motion to Reconsider Order Granting the United States of America's Suggestion of Subject Matter Jurisdiction With Respect to Counts 1 and 2 of the Complaint (cc: Philip A. Duggan via first class mail). Signed by Judge Salvador Mendoza, Jr. (PL, Case Administrator)

1

FILED IN THE
U.S. DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

2

Aug 10, 2017
SEAN F. MCAVOY, CLERK

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

3
4

PHILIP A. DUGGAN,

No. 2:16-CV-0034-SMJ

5
Plaintiff,
6
v.
7
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
8
Defendant.
9

ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S
MOTION TO RECONSIDER
ORDER GRANTING THE UNITED
STATES OF AMERICA’S
SUGGESTION OF SUBJECT
MATTER JURISDICTION WITH
RESPECT TO COUNTS 1 AND 2
OF THE COMPLAINT

10
11
Before the Court, without oral argument, is Plaintiff Duggan’s Motion to
12
Reconsider Order Granting the United States of America’s Suggestion of Lack of
13
Subject Matter Jurisdiction with Respect to Counts 1 and 2 of the Complaint. ECF
14
No. 51. Through this motion Plaintiff Duggan requests that the Court vacate its
15
previous Order granting the United States’ motion, ECF No. 47, and deny it instead.
16
ECF No. 51. The United States opposes Duggan’s motion. ECF No. 57. Having
17
reviewed the pleadings and the file in this matter, the Court is fully informed and
18
denies the instant motion.
19
The Court’s Scheduling Order addressed the filing of motions to reconsider.
20
ECF No. 39 at 10. That order directs the parties to follow the U.S. District Court for

ORDER - 1

1

the Western District of Washington’s Local Rule 7(h). Id. The Scheduling Order

2

also informs parties that motions to reconsider are disfavored and such motions

3

exceeding five (5) pages will not be considered. Id. Local Rule 7(h) also informs

4

parties that motions to reconsider are ordinarily denied “in the absence of a showing

5

of manifest error in the prior ruling or a showing of new facts or legal authority

6

which could not have been brought to [the Court’s] attention earlier with reasonable

7

diligence.” Local Rule 7(h)(1) of the U.S. District Court for the Western District of

8

Washington. Further, no responses, and by extension replies, are allowed on

9

motions to reconsider absent a request from the parties to file such documents. Id.

10

at 7(h)(3).

11

Here, although Duggan’s motion is 11 pages long, the Court has reviewed it.

12

The Court has also considered the United States’ response, ECF No. 57, and

13

Duggan’s reply, ECF No. 66. Duggan cites Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60 as

14

the basis for his request. ECF No. 66 at 2. Duggan states that “he should have better

15

pointed out the reasons why certain letters were requests for abatement and refund

16

not just about tax liability” and that “[t]his could be considered mistake or excusable

17

neglect.” ECF No. 66 at 2.

18

The Court has reviewed Duggan’s filings regarding the instant motion and

19

they can be fairly described as rearguing the same matters the Court considered in

20

rendering its decision regarding counts one and two of the complaint. See ECF. Nos.

ORDER - 2

1

47, 51 and 66. In making its previous ruling at issue here, ECF No. 47, the Court

2

considered all of the parties’ filings and the entire file, as applicable to the United

3

States’ motion regarding this Court’s subject matter jurisdiction with respect to

4

counts one and two. Duggan offers no new information or legal bases for the Court

5

to reassess and reverse its decision. That Duggan disagrees with the Court’s findings

6

and ruling is not a sufficient basis for the Court to grant Duggan’s present request.

7

Therefore, the Court denies the instant motion.

8

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED:

9

1.

Plaintiff’s Motion to Reconsider Order Granting the United States of

10

America’s Suggestion of Lack of Subject Matter Jurisdiction with

11

Respect to Counts 1 and 2 of the Complaint, ECF No. 51, is DENIED.

12

IT IS SO ORDERED. The Clerk’s Office is directed to enter this Order and

13
14

provide copies to all counsel.
DATED this 10th day of August 2017.

15
__________________________
SALVADOR MENDOZA, JR.
United States District Judge

16
17
18
19
20

ORDER - 3