Suber v. Snohomish County Jail Mental Health Services et al

Filing 15

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION by U.S. District Judge John C Coughenour re 14 Objections to Report and Recommendation filed by James Suber, 13 Report and Recommendations. **2 PAGE(S), PRINT ALL**(James Suber, Prisoner ID: 849597)(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

JAMES SUBER,

10

Plaintiff,

ORDER

v.

11
12

CASE NO. C18-0484-JCC

SNOHOMISH COUNTY JAIL, et al.,

13

Defendants.

14
15

This matter comes before the Court on Plaintiff’s amended civil rights complaint (Dkt.

16

No. 12), United States Magistrate Judge Mary Alice Theiler’s Report and Recommendation

17

(“R&R”) (Dkt. No. 13), and Plaintiff’s objections to the R&R (Dkt. No. 14). Having reviewed

18

the materials submitted and the record and determined that oral argument is not necessary, the

19

Court hereby OVERRULES Plaintiff’s objections and ADOPTS Judge Theiler’s R&R for the

20

reasons described below.

21

Plaintiff, proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, submitted a prisoner civil rights

22

complaint under 42 U.S.C. section 1983. (Dkt. No. 5 at 1.) Plaintiff alleged that Snohomish

23

County Jail staff members and/or officials failed to respond to his requests for mental health

24

services. (Id. at 3.) The Court declined to order service of the complaint after concluding that it

25

was unclear from the face of the complaint who allegedly harmed Plaintiff and what

26

constitutional right was violated. (Dkt. No. 6 at 2–4.) With leave of the Court (Id. at 4), Plaintiff
ORDER
C18-0484-JCC
PAGE - 1

1

filed an amended complaint (Dkt. No. 12). While the amended complaint now identifies the

2

constitutional rights allegedly violated, it still does not identify a proper defendant in this matter.

3

(See generally id.) On this basis, Judge Thieler issued an R&R recommending Plaintiff’s claim

4

be dismissed without prejudice pursuant to 28 U.S.C. section 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii). Plaintiff objects

5

to Judge Theiler’s R&R (Dkt. No. 14).

6

Plaintiff’s objections identify no particular error in the R&R. (See generally id. at 1–3.)

7

Instead, they are a detailed restatement of Plaintiff’s prior allegations. (Id.) They still lack a key

8

element necessary to maintain suit—a properly-named defendant. (Id.) The Court reviews the

9

record de novo when considering an objection to an R&R. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Based

10

upon this review, the Court finds that Plaintiff has failed to state a claim upon which relief can be

11

granted. Accordingly, Plaintiff’s amended complaint should be dismissed without prejudice

12

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. section 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii).

13
14

For the reasons stated herein, the Court OVERRULES Plaintiff’s objections, ADOPTS
the R&R, and ORDERS as follows:

15

(1) Plaintiff’s complaint is DISMISSED without prejudice.

16

(2) The Clerk is directed to send copies of this order to Plaintiff and to Judge Theiler.

17
18

DATED this 9th day of July 2018.

A

19
20
21

John C. Coughenour
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

22
23
24
25
26
ORDER
C18-0484-JCC
PAGE - 2