Hodjera et al v. BASF Catalysts, LLC et al

Filing 221

ORDER granting plaintiffs' motions for reconsideration, dkt. ## 200 , 201 , 202 ; the Court hereby clarifies that their claims should have been dismissed without prejudice, signed by Judge Robert S. Lasnik. (SWT)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE 7 8 9 10 11 MATTHEW HODJERA and SYLVIA HODJERA, 12 13 14 15 Plaintiffs, v. Case No. C17-48RSL ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFFS’ MOTIONS FOR RECONSIDERATION BASF CATALYSTS LLC, et al., Defendants. 16 17 This matter comes before the Court on plaintiffs’ motions for reconsideration. Dkt. ## 18 200, 201, 202. After the Court dismissed plaintiffs’ claims against several defendants for lack of 19 personal jurisdiction, the Court determined that an amended complaint did not remedy the 20 jurisdictional defects and dismissed the claims “with prejudice.” Dkt. # 186 at 3. Plaintiffs filed 21 the instant motions to reconsider that order on the limited ground that the dismissal should have 22 been without prejudice. The Court sought further briefing from the relevant defendants, and the 23 only defendant to respond does not oppose reconsideration of the Court’s order. Dkt. # 216. 24 Motions for reconsideration are disfavored in this district, but will be granted upon “a 25 showing of manifest error.” LCR 7(h)(1). As plaintiffs accurately point out, dismissal for lack of 26 personal jurisdiction is not a determination on a claim’s merits. Kendall v. Overseas Dev. Corp., 27 700 F.2d 536, 539 (9th Cir. 1983). Though the order used “dismissed with prejudice” as 28 shorthand, it should have stated that plaintiffs would not be granted further leave to amend. ORDER GRANTING MOTIONS FOR RECONSIDERATION - 1 1 For that reason, plaintiffs’ motions for reconsideration, Dkt. ## 200, 201, 202, are 2 GRANTED, and the Court hereby clarifies that their claims should have been dismissed without 3 prejudice. 4 5 DATED this 27th day of October, 2017. 6 7 8 A Robert S. Lasnik 9 United States District Judge 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 ORDER GRANTING MOTIONS FOR RECONSIDERATION - 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?