State of Washington, et al., v. Trump., et al
ORDER denying pro se movant Silver Cloud Musafir's 181 Motion for Reconsideration. Signed by Judge James L. Robart. (PM) cc: Musafir via the USPS
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON
STATE OF WASHINGTON, et al.,
ORDER DENYING MOTION TO
DONALD J. TRUMP, et al.,
CASE NO. C17-0141JLR
Before the court is a filing by pro se movant Silver Cloud Musafir in response to
the court’s order striking his amicus curiae brief. (Resp. (Dkt. # 181).) The court struck
Mr. Musafir’s amicus curiae brief (Dkt # 85) because Mr. Musafir filed it in violation of
the court’s previous order regarding the filing of such briefs. (Order Striking A.C. Brief
(Dkt. # 90) (citing Order Re: AC Brief Filing (Dkt. # 84)).) The court, however, stated
that Mr. Musafir “may re-file his brief if he does so in conformity with the court’s order.”
(Id.) Instead of refiling his brief in conformity with the court’s order, Mr. Musafir filed
the present “response” to the court’s order striking his amicus curiae brief. (See Resp.)
ORDER - 1
The court liberally construes Mr. Musafir’s “response” as a motion to reconsider the
court’s ruling. 1
Pursuant to Local Civil Rule 7(h)(1), motions for reconsideration are disfavored,
and the court will ordinarily deny them unless there is a showing of (a) manifest error in
the prior ruling, or (b) facts or legal authority which could not have been brought to the
court’s attention earlier with reasonable diligence. Local Rules W.D. Wash. LCR
7(h)(1). Mr. Musafir has made neither showing. (See generally Resp.) Accordingly, the
court DENIES his motion (Dkt. # 181).
Dated this 13th day of April, 2017.
JAMES L. ROBART
United States District Judge
“Courts in this circuit have an obligation to give a liberal construction to the filings of
pro se litigants.” Blaisdell v. Frappiea, 729 F.3d 1237, 1241 (9th Cir. 2013).
ORDER - 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?