Mweru et al v. United States of America et al

Filing 10

ORDER denying Plaintiffs' 9 Motion for Reconsideration. The dismissal entered on February 16, 2017 remains in effect. Signed by Judge Marsha J. Pechman. (PM) cc: plaintiffs via first class mail

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON
AT SEATTLE

8
9
10

LILLIAN MWERU AND
ELIZABETH NYAMBURA,

11
Plaintiffs,

CASE NO. C17-1497-MJP
ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR
RECONSIDERATION

12
v.
13
14

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, et
al.,
Defendants.

15
16

THIS MATTER comes before the Court on Plaintiffs’ Motion for Reconsideration of

17

Dismissal. (Dkt. No. 9.) Having reviewed the Motion and all related papers, the Court DENIES

18

the Motion.

19

Plaintiffs filed this case on October 5, 2017, alleging that the United States Citizenship

20

and Immigration Service (“USCIS”) wrongfully denied them lawful permanent resident status.

21

(Dkt. No. 1.) On December 6, 2017, the Court ordered the parties to file a Joint Status Report

22

(“JSR”) no later than January 17, 2018. (Dkt. No. 2.) After no JSR was filed, the Court

23

extended the deadline to February 2, 2018. (Dkt. No. 3.) On the day the JSR was due, Plaintiffs

24

ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION - 1

1

filed an affidavit of service and an amended complaint stating that they were unable to comply

2

with the Court’s order regarding the JSR because “Defendants have filed no response.” (Dkt.

3

No. 4.) On February 16, 2018, the Court dismissed the case due to the parties’ failure to file a

4

JSR. (Dkt. No. 8.)

5

Motions for reconsideration are disfavored and are ordinarily denied “in the absence of a

6

showing of manifest error in the prior ruling or a showing of new facts or legal authority which

7

could not have been brought to its attention earlier with reasonable diligence.” See LCR 7(h)(1).

8

Plaintiffs’ motion does not provide the Court with sufficient justification for reconsideration.

9

Even giving pro se plaintiffs the benefit of any doubt, see Karim-Panahi v. Los Angeles Police

10

Dept., 839 F.2d 621, 623 (9th Cir. 1988), they failed to file proper procedures for serving their

11

complaint or complying with the Court’s Orders regarding the JSR. Further, reconsideration in

12

this case would be futile, as the Court does not have jurisdiction in the first instance to hear what

13

is effectively an appeal of an unfavorable determination regarding Plaintiff’s immigration

14

application. See 8 C.F.R. 245.3; § 103.3 (appellate jurisdiction for denial of application or

15

petition lies with Board of Immigration Appeals or the USCIS Administrative Appeals Office).

16

Therefore, the Court DENIES the Motion. The dismissal entered on February 16, 2017

17

remains in effect.

18

The clerk is ordered to provide copies of this order to all counsel.

19

Dated March 8, 2018.

21

A

22

Marsha J. Pechman
United States District Judge

20

23
24

ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION - 2