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)

Download PDF
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

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?