Ville v. Family Resource Home Care
Filing
7
ORDER REFERRING TO PRO BONO PANEL re plaintiff's 4 MOTION to Appoint Counsel; clerk directed to renote motion for 7/14/17 by Judge Ricardo S Martinez. (RS) cc plaintiff, S Haas
1
2
3
4
5
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON
AT SEATTLE
6
7
8
ISATU VILLE,
Plaintiff,
9
10
v.
11
FAMILY RESOURCE HOME CARE,
12
Defendant.
13
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
CASE NO. C17-0606 RSM
ORDER DEFERRING MOTION TO
APPOINT COUNSEL AND REFERRING
MATTER TO PRO BONO SCREENING
PANEL
14
15
This matter comes before the Court on Plaintiff’s Motion to Appoint Counsel. Dkt. #4.
16
Plaintiff states that she contacted Seattle’s Employ Legal Clinic, and was informed that
17
someone would get back to her, but that never occurred. Id. Plaintiff has been granted leave to
18
proceed in forma pauperis in this matter. Dkt. #3. The Complaint was filed on May 5, 2017.
19
20
21
Dkt. #6. Summonses have been issued and mailed to Plaintiff for service, but no one has yet
appeared on behalf of Defendant.
22
In her Complaint, Plaintiff alleges employment discrimination based on national origin
23
and race, in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act. Dkt. #6 at 4. She provides extensive
24
background to the claims in this matter, including allegations of actions taken by specific
25
26
supervisors on specific dates. Id. at 2-24. Plaintiff further alleges that she is a black female
27
from Sierra Leone, and asserts that her supervisor discharged her for those reasons, and in
28
retaliation for participating in protected activity. Dkt. #6 at 2-4. Plaintiff made a complaint to
ORDER
PAGE - 1
1
2
3
4
the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”), which issued her a right-to-sue
letter on March 30, 2017. Id. at 25-26. This matter followed.
This District has adopted a plan for the representation of pro se plaintiffs in civil rights
actions. General Order 10-05. In accordance with that plan, the court refers Plaintiff’s motion
5
to appoint counsel to the Nonprisoner Civil Rights Case Screening Committee (“Screening
6
7
Committee”) for review and a recommendation as to whether the court should appoint counsel.
8
The Clerk SHALL provide a copy of the Complaint to the Screening panel, along with the
9
motion.
10
The Clerk SHALL RENOTE Plaintiff’s motion for appointment of counsel (Dkt. #4)
11
for July 14, 2017. However, the Court will not consider the motion until it receives the
12
13
14
Screening Committee’s recommendation.
DATED this 12th day of May 2017.
15
A
16
17
RICARDO S. MARTINEZ
CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
ORDER
PAGE - 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?