Reevis v. Spokane County Superior Courts et al

Filing 8

ORDER DISMISSING ACTION - This action is DISMISSED without prejudice for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. The court certifies any appeal of this dismissal would not be taken in good faith. Signed by Judge Rosanna Malouf Peterson. (LMR, Case Administrator) (Service of Notice on parties not registered as users of the Court CM/ECF system accomplished via USPS mail.)

1

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

2

Jul 14, 2021
SEAN F. MCAVOY, CLERK

3
4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

5
6

CHARLES JOSEPH REEVIS,
Plaintiff,

7
8

v.

NO: 2:21-CV-00060-RMP
ORDER DISMISSING ACTION

15

SPOKANE COUNTY SUPERIOR
COURTS, US DEPARMENT OF
JUSTICE DIRECTOR FBI
MISCONDUCT DIVISION, US
DISTRICT COURT EASTERN
WASHINGTON, SPOKANE
COUNTY DETENTION SERVICES,
and STATE OF WASHINGTON
DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL AND
HEALTH SERVICES
BEHAVIORAL HEALTH
ADMINISTRATION EASTERN
STATE HOSPITAL,

16

Defendants.

9
10
11
12
13
14

17
18

By Order filed May 28, 2021, the Court granted Plaintiff Charles Joseph

19

Reevis thirty days to voluntarily dismiss this action. ECF No. 7. The Court found

20

that Mr. Reevis’s pro se submission, five two-page Standard Form 95 (“SF 95s”),

21

filed while he was incarcerated at the Spokane County Corrections Center, did not

ORDER DISMISSING ACTION -- 1

1

support a federal tort claim. Id. at 4–6. Consequently, Plaintiff’s claims were

2

subject to dismissal for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. See McNeil v. United

3

States, 508 U.S. 106, 110, 113 (1993).

4

Plaintiff is currently housed at Comprehensive Health Care - Yakima

5

Competency Restoration, and is proceeding in forma pauperis, but without the

6

obligation to pay the $350.00 filing fee for this action. ECF No. 6. Plaintiff did

7

not avail himself of the opportunity to voluntarily dismiss this action.

8

Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED:

9

1. This action is DISMISSED without prejudice for lack of subject matter

10
11

jurisdiction.
2. Based on the Court’s reading of Hoffmann v. Pulido, 928 F.3d 1147,

12

1152 (9th Cir. 2019), this dismissal will NOT count as a “strike” under

13

28 U.S.C. § 1915(g).

14

3. This case is DISMISSED and CLOSED.

15

4. Judgment of dismissal without prejudice shall be entered for Defendants.

16

IT IS SO ORDERED. The District Court Clerk is DIRECTED to enter

17

this Order, enter judgment, provide a copy to Plaintiff and CLOSE the file. The

18

Court certifies pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal of this Order

19

would not be taken in good faith and would lack any arguable basis in law or fact.

20

DATED July 14, 2021.

21

ORDER DISMISSING ACTION -- 2

s/ Rosanna Malouf Peterson
ROSANNA MALOUF PETERSON
United States District Judge