USA, et al v. State of Washington, et al

Filing 21610

ORDER RE-NOTING ( 21609 in 2:70-cv-09213-RSM) Joint Stipulated MOTION to Stay Subproceeding and for Order to Refer to Mediation, ( 22 in 2:17-sp-00003-RSM) Joint Stipulated MOTION to Stay Subproceeding and for Order to Refer to Mediation ; Noting Date 10/13/2017, by Judge Ricardo S Martinez. (SWT)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE 6 7 8 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, et al., 9 10 11 12 Plaintiffs, v. STATE OF WASHINGTON, et al., Case No. C70-9213 Sub-proceeding No. 17-sp-03 ORDER RE-NOTING MOTION TO STAY PROCEEDINGS Defendants. 13 14 15 THIS MATTER comes before the Court on a “Joint Stipulated Motion to Stay Subproceedings and for Order to Refer to Mediation.” Dkt. #22. This motion has been filed by 16 Petitioner, the Stillaguamish Tribe of Indians, on behalf of itself, the Upper Skagit Indian Tribe 17 and Swinomish Indian Tribal Communities. Id. It was noted for consideration on the same day 18 it was filed. 19 20 Petitioner has improperly noted this motion in violation of the Court’s Local Rules. While these three Tribes may have stipulated among themselves that mediation is the preferred 21 22 action in this matter, and so jointly moved, numerous other parties are involved and have not 23 joined the motion or so stipulated. 24 Respondent by Petitioner in the Request for Determination. 25 Washington has neither stipulated to nor joined the motion. See Dkt. #22. Further, the moving 26 ORDER RE-NOTING MOTION -1 Indeed, the State of Washington is the only named Dkt. #4. Yet, the State of 1 parties ask the Court to Order all interested parties to attend mediation; yet, most of the interested 2 parties who have appeared to date have not stipulated to or joined in the instant motion as 3 evidenced by any lack of signature to the “joint stipulated” motion. See Dkt. #22. By 4 unilaterally noting the motion as a stipulation on the same day it was filed, Petitioner denied any 5 of these parties the right to respond or inform the Court as to their own positions on the matter.1 6 Accordingly, the Motion for Stay is hereby RE-NOTED for consideration on Friday, 7 8 9 October 13, 2017, pursuant to Local Civil Rule 7(d)(3). Any responses are due no later than the Monday before the noting date. Any reply is due no later than the noting date. DATED this 28th day of September 2017. 10 11 A 12 RICARDO S. MARTINEZ CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 1 25 26 The Court also notes that while the moving parties include a statement that they have not been informed of any interested party opposing the entry of the proposed Order, the motion is unsupported by any Declaration or other admissible evidence supporting that statement. ORDER RE-NOTING MOTION -2

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?