Wright v. Gregorio et al

Filing 59

ORDER denying Plaintiff's 54 Motion for Amended Complaint, signed by Judge Marsha J. Pechman. (SWT) (cc: Plaintiff via USPS)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON
AT SEATTLE

8
9
10

ROGER SINCLAIR WRIGHT,

11

Plaintiff,

12
13
14

CASE NO. C14-592 MJP
ORDER ON MOTION TO FILE
AMENDED COMPLAINT

v.
CHRISTOPHER GREGORIO, et al.,
Defendants.

15
16

The Court has received and reviewed Plaintiff’s Motion for Amended Complaint (Dkt.

17

No. 54), Defendants’ Opposition to Plaintiff’s Motion for Amended Complaint (Dkt. No. 57),

18

Plaintiff’s Reply in Support of Motion to Amend (Dkt. No. 58), as well as relevant portions of

19

the record. The Court rules as follows:

20

IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiff’s motion to amend his complaint is DENIED.

21

This matter was dismissed without prejudice on July 8, 2015 when Plaintiff failed to

22

respond to Defendants’ motion to dismiss. (Dkt. No. 51.) Plaintiff (representing himself pro se)

23

has provided no reason why his matter should be reopened over two years later. The Court’s

24

ORDER ON MOTION TO FILE AMENDED COMPLAINT - 1

1

dismissal without prejudice in 2015 leaves Plaintiff the option to re-file the complaint as a new

2

cause of action if he so chooses, but does not operate as permission to renew this lawsuit

3

whenever he chooses.

4
5

This matter is closed and will remain closed. Plaintiff’s motion to amend his complaint is
DENIED.

6
7

The clerk is ordered to provide copies of this order to Plaintiff and to all counsel.

8

Dated September 5, 2017.

10

A

11

Marsha J. Pechman
United States District Judge

9

12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24

ORDER ON MOTION TO FILE AMENDED COMPLAINT - 2