Chen v. Campbell et al

Filing 14

ORDER granting defendants' 6 Motion to Dismiss by Judge Ricardo S Martinez.(RS) cc plaintiff

Download PDF
  1 2 3 4 5 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Case No. C17-149 RSM JOHN CHEN, Plaintiff, ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS v. ANDREW CAMPBELL and ANDREW HARTSTONE, INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE, Defendants. This matter comes before the Court on Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss. Dkt. #6. Defendants move to dismiss Plaintiff’s case pursuant to Rule 12(b)(1) for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, 12(b)(2) for lack of personal jurisdiction, and 12(b)(5) for insufficient service of 21 process. Plaintiff has failed to file a Response. 22 considered by the court as an admission that the motion has merit.” Local Civil Rule 7(b)(2). 23 The Court agrees with Defendants that the United States is the only proper defendant in this 24 The failure to file a response “may be matter, that Plaintiff’s refund suit fails to plead applicable statutory requirements, and that 25 26 Plaintiff has not fully complied with the proper service requirements. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(i). 27 The Court therefore finds that Plaintiff’s Complaint fails for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, 28 lack of personal jurisdiction, and for insufficient service of process, and that dismissal is ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS - 1   1 2 3 4 warranted. Given these fundamental jurisdictional and procedural problems, the Court sees no reason to grant leave to amend. Having reviewed the instant Motion, all evidence submitted in support of the motion, and the remainder of the record, the Court hereby finds and ORDERS that Defendants’ Motion 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 to Dismiss (Dkt. #7) is GRANTED and all of plaintiff’s claims are DISMISSED. This case is CLOSED. DATED this 25th day of May 2017. A RICARDO S. MARTINEZ CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS - 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?