State of Washington, et al., v. Trump., et al
ORDER denying non-party Rick Satcher's 212 Motion for Reconsideration of the court's order denying him both intervention as of right and permissive intervention in this lawsuit. Signed by Judge James L. Robart. (PM) cc: Rick Satcher via first class mail
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON
STATE OF WASHINGTON, et al.,
CASE NO. C17-0141JLR
ORDER DENYING MOTION
DONALD J. TRUMP, et al.,
Before the court is non-party Rick Satcher’s motion. (Mot. (Dkt. # 212).) Mr.
Satcher is appearing pro se, and the court liberally construes his motion as a motion for
reconsideration of the court’s order denying him both intervention as of right and
permissive intervention in this lawsuit. 1 (See Order (Dkt. # 174).) Having considered the
motion, the relevant portions of the record, and the applicable law, the court DENIES Mr.
Satcher’s motion for reconsideration.
The court liberally construes the pleadings of pro se litigants. See Brazil v. U.S. Dep’t
of Navy, 66 F.3d 193, 199 (9th Cir. 1995).
ORDER - 1
Pursuant to the Western District of Washington’s Local Civil Rules, a “motion
[for reconsideration] shall be filed within fourteen days after the order to which it relates
is filed.” Local Rules W.D. Wash. LCR 7(h)(2). The court filed its order denying Mr.
Satcher’s motion to intervene on March 30, 2017. (See Order.) Accordingly, Mr.
Satcher’s motion for reconsideration is untimely, and the court DENIES it on this ground.
See Local Rules W.D. Wash. LCR 7(h)(2) (“Failure to comply with this subsection may
be grounds for denial of the motion.”).
In addition, “[m]otions for reconsideration are disfavored,” and the court “will
ordinarily deny such motions in the absence of a showing of manifest error in the prior
ruling or a showing of new facts or legal authority which could not have been brought to
its attention earlier with reasonable diligence.” Id., LCR 7(h)(1). Mr. Satcher makes no
such showing. (See generally Mot.) The court concludes, therefore, that—in addition to
being untimely—Mr. Satcher’s motion lacks merits. Thus, the court DENIES Mr.
Satcher’s motion for reconsideration on this substantive ground as well (Dkt. # 212).
Dated this 26th day of February, 2018.
JAMES L. ROBART
United States District Judge
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?