Lyall v. U S Bank National Assocation et al
ORDER granting defendant UW's 34 Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim signed by Judge Richard A Jones.(RS)
THE HONORABLE JUDGE RICHARD A. JONES
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON
MARTA D. LYALL,
U.S. BANK NATIONAL
ASSOCIATION; TRUMAN TITLE 2013 )
SC3 TITLE TRUST; TRUMAN
CAPITAL ADVISORS, LP;
RUSHMORE LOAN MANAGEMENT )
SERVICES, LLC; BANK OF AMERICA, )
N.A.; DITECH HOME LOAN
SERVICING; CWABS MASTER
TRUST, REVOLVING HOME EQUITY )
LOAN ASSET BACKED NOTES,
SERIES 2004-"O"; CARNEGIE
MELLON UNIVERSITY; UNIVERSITY )
OF WASHINGTON; WASHINGTON
STATE DEPARTMENT OF
COMMERCE; DISPUTE RESOLUTION )
CENTER OF KING COUNTY; and
JOHN AND JANE DOES 1-100,
Case No: 17-00472-RAJ
This matter comes before the Court on Defendant University of Washington’s
(“UW”) Motion to Dismiss. Dkt. # 34. On June 14, 2017, the Court warned Plaintiff that
if she chooses to respond to UW’s Motion, she must do so no later than June 26, 2017.
Dkt. # 48. Plaintiff did not file a response in opposition to the Motion, and the Court
ORDER - 1
granted the Motion. Dkt. # 68.
On June 27, 2017, Plaintiff filed a letter seeking reconsideration of this
determination, stating that she suffered injuries the day before the deadline to respond
and therefore could not complete her brief. Dkt. ## 70, 79. In light of her injuries, the
Court granted Plaintiff an extension, requiring her to respond to the Motion no later than
July 6, 2017. Dkt. # 81.
Plaintiff has now had ample time to respond to the Motion yet has chosen not to
do so. The Court considers Plaintiff’s failure to respond—twice—as an admission that
the Motion has merit. Local Rules W.D. Wash. LCR 7(b)(2). This is a procedural
determination; the Court refrains from commenting on the underlying merits of the
Accordingly, UW’s Motion is GRANTED. Dkt. # 34.
Dated this 12th day of July, 2017.
The Honorable Richard A. Jones
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?