Linehan v. AllianceOne Receivables Management, Inc.

Filing 297

ORDER granting plaintiff's 284 Motion to dismiss her WA Consumer Protection Act claim against dfts Audit & Adjustment Co and Kimberlee Walker Olsen by U.S. District Judge John C Coughenour.(RS)

Download PDF
THE HONORABLE JOHN C. COUGHENOUR 1 2 3 4 5 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE 7 8 9 10 TIMOTHY LINEHAN, on behalf of Plaintiff and a class, ORDER Plaintiff, 11 v. 12 13 14 ALLIANCEONE RECEIVABLES MANAGEMENT, INC., Defendant. 15 16 CASE NO. C15-1012-JCC This matter comes before the Court on Plaintiff Alexandra Hewardt Anderson’s motion 17 to dismiss (Dkt. No. 284). Anderson seeks a dismissal without prejudice of her Washington 18 Consumer Protection Act (WCPA) claim against Defendants Audit & Adjustment Company, Inc. 19 and Kimberlee Walker Olsen. (Id. at 1.) 20 Typically, a “plaintiff’s motion to dismiss a single claim of a multi-count complaint is 21 properly treated as a motion to amend under Fed. R. Civ. P. 15.” Gronholz v. Sears, Roebuck & 22 Co., 836 F.2d 515, 517 (9th Cir. 1987). Here, however, the pleading amendment deadline passed 23 a month before Anderson filed her motion. (See Dkt. Nos. 122, 284.) Thus, Anderson’s “ability 24 to amend h[er] complaint [i]s governed by Rule 16(b), not Rule 15(a).” See Johnson v. Mammoth 25 Recreations, Inc., 975 F.2d 604, 608 (9th Cir. 1992). Under the Rule 16(b) standard, Anderson 26 must show “good cause” to modify the case schedule. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 16(b)(4). PAGE - 1 1 Anderson argues that good cause exists here because, in light of the Court’s denial of 2 class certification, she determined that the amount of money at issue for her WCPA claim does 3 not justify the resources that would be expended. (Dkt. No. 294 at 2.) Anderson further asserts 4 that removing her WCPA claim will be more efficient for the parties and the Court. (Id.) Given 5 this efficiency, as well as Anderson’s relatively late joinder, the Court finds good cause to excuse 6 her untimely filing. 7 Accordingly, Anderson’s motion to dismiss (Dkt. No. 284) is GRANTED. Anderson’s 8 claim is dismissed without prejudice. 9 DATED this 13th day of February 2017. 10 11 12 A 13 14 15 John C. Coughenour UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 ORDER PAGE - 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?