Moore v. King County Jail

Filing 19

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS re 18 Objections to Report and Recommendation filed by David A Moore by U.S. District Judge John C Coughenour. (SG)

THE HONORABLE JOHN C. COUGHENOUR

1
2
3
4
5
6

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON
AT SEATTLE

7
8
9

DAVID A. MOORE,

10
11
12
13

Plaintiff,
v.

CASE NO. C17-0347-JCC
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND
RECOMMENDATION

KING COUNTY JAIL, et al.,
Defendants.

14
15

This matter comes before the Court on Plaintiff David A. Moore’s objections (Dkt. No.

16

18) to the report and recommendation (Dkt. No. 17) issued by the Honorable Brian A. Tsuchida,

17

United States Magistrate Judge. Having reviewed Judge Tsuchida’s report and recommendation,

18

Plaintiff’s objection, and the relevant record, the Court OVERRULES Plaintiff’s objection and

19

ADOPTS the report and recommendation for the reasons set forth herein.

20

Plaintiff, acting pro se, filed a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 claim against various King County

21

entities. (Dkt. No. 11.) Plaintiff alleges he was attacked by Seattle Police, denied medical care,

22

and mistreated in prison. (See Dkt. No. 11-1.) Judge Tsuchida declined service of Plaintiff’s

23

complaint and granted leave to amend. (Dkt. No. 12 at 1.) Plaintiff filed an unsigned, amended

24

complaint, adding King County as a defendant and alleging similar facts. (Dkt. No. 15 at 3–5.)

25

Judge Tsuchida now recommends the complaint be dismissed without prejudice for failure to

26

state a claim. (Dkt. No. 17 at 4.) Plaintiff filed an objection to the report and recommendation.
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND
RECOMMENDATION
PAGE - 1

1

(Dkt. No. 18.)

2

A district judge reviews objections to a magistrate judge’s report and recommendation de

3

novo. Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(3). The district judge may accept, reject, or modify the recommended

4

disposition; receive further evidence; or return the matter to the magistrate judge with

5

instructions. Id.

6

Judge Tsuchida found Plaintiff failed to state a claim under § 1983. (Dkt. No. 17 at 4.)

7

Judge Tsuchida noted: (1) Plaintiff raised a § 1983 claim against parties who are immune from

8

suit; (2) when Defendants were proper, Plaintiff failed to allege unconstitutional policies; and

9

(3) Plaintiff’s claims are barred by statute of limitations. (Dkt. No. 12 at 3–5.) This Court agrees

10

with Judge Tsuchida’s analysis and conclusions and ADOPTS the report and recommendation.

11

In his objection, Plaintiff seems to argue the merits of his § 1983 claim by alleging

12

current violations of Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). (Dkt. No. 18 at 1.)

13

This claim was not raised in his original complaint and does not directly address any of Judge

14

Tsuchida’s recommendations. Raising a new claim in an objection is not proper procedural form

15

and will not be considered by this Court. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a)(2); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(1).

16

Plaintiff’s objection is OVERRULED and the Court ADOPTS Judge Tsuchida’s

17

recommendation.

18

For the reasons explained herein, the Court OVERRULES Plaintiff’s objection (Dkt. No.

19

18) and ADOPTS the report and recommendation (Dkt. No. 17.) The complaint (Dkt. No. 11) is

20

DISMISSED without prejudice. The Clerk is DIRECTED to close this case.

21

DATED this 6th day of July 2017.

A

22
23
24

John C. Coughenour
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

25
26
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND
RECOMMENDATION
PAGE - 2