United States of America ex rel. Ruckman v. Chan et al
Filing
186
ORDER granting 177 the Government's Motion for Leave to File Supplemental Evidence, signed by Judge Ronald B. Leighton.(DN)
1
HONORABLE RONALD B. LEIGHTON
2
3
4
5
6
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON
AT TACOMA
7
8
RUTH L RUCKMAN,
CASE NO. C08-5532 RBL
9
Plaintiff,
ORDER
10
v.
11
ALFRED H CHAN,
12
Defendant.
13
14
THIS MATTER comes on before the above-entitled Court upon the Government’s
15 Motion for Leave to File Supplemental Evidence in Support of the United States’ Motion for
16 Partial Default Judgment, or, in the Alternative, Partial Summary Judgment [Dkt. #177]. Having
17 considered the entirety of the records and file herein, the Court finds and rules as follows:
18
The government seeks to file a supplemental declaration attaching certain evidence
19 related to their underlying substantive motion for partial default judgment or, alternatively,
20 partial summary judgment. The evidence was not obtained until a day after the underlying
21 motion was filed. No defendant has filed a response to the motion to file the supplemental
22 evidence. Pursuant to CR7(b)(2), Local Rules W.D. Wash., “[i]f a party fails to file papers in
23 opposition to a motion, such failure may be considered by the court as an admission that the
24
ORDER - 1
1 motion has merit.” A review of the motion reveals that it does have merit, and should be
2 granted. Accordingly:
3
The Government’s Motion for Leave to File Supplemental Evidence [Dkt. #177] is
4 GRANTED. The Court will consider the evidence attached to the Supplemental Declaration of
5 Assistant United States Attorney David East [Dkt. #178] in deciding the Government’s Motion
6 for Partial Default Judgment, or, in the Alternative, Partial Summary Judgment [Dkt. #172].
7
IT IS SO ORDERED.
8
Dated this 22nd day of November, 2011.
10
A
11
RONALD B. LEIGHTON
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
9
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
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?