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