Richey v. Dahne

Filing 11

ORDER DECLINING TO ADOPT REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS by Judge Benjamin H Settle re 10 Objections to Report and Recommendation filed by Thomas William Sinclair Richey. (TG; cc mailed to plaintiff)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT TACOMA 5 6 THOMAS WILLIAM SINCLAIR RICHEY, 7 Plaintiff, 8 v. 9 D. DAHNE, 10 Defendant. 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 CASE NO. C12-5060 BHS ORDER DECLINING TO ADOPT REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION AND GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S REQUEST TO WITHDRAW HIS MOTION TO DISMISS This matter comes before the Court on the Report and Recommendation (“R&R”) of the Honorable Karen L. Strombom, United States Magistrate Judge (Dkt. 9) and Thomas William Sinclair Richey’s (“Richey”) objections to the R&R and his request to withdraw his previously filed motion to withdraw (Dkt. 10). The Court will refer to Richey’s motion to withdraw as a “motion to dismiss.” The Court has considered the R&R and Richey’s objections and request to withdraw his earlier motion, as well as the remaining record, and hereby declines to adopt the R&R and grants Richey’s request to withdraw his motion to dismiss for the reasons stated herein. On February 26, 2012, Richey filed a complaint against D. Dahne. Dkt. 4. A few days later, on February 29, 2012, Richey filed a motion to voluntarily dismiss his lawsuit 22 ORDER - 1 1 without prejudice and sought a waiver or return of his filing fee. Dkt. 8. On March 27, 2 2012, Magistrate Judge Karen L. Strombom issued an R&R (Dkt. 9). In it, Judge 3 Strombom ruled in part that, pursuant to Rule 41(a)(1)(i), Richey’s voluntary dismissal 4 was granted. 5 Richey’s reason for filing his motion to dismiss was based on two prior rulings he 6 received from Magistrate Judge Strombom involving the filing of grievances. In the two 7 prior R&Rs, Judge Strombom had ruled that Richey’s claims were procedurally barred 8 for failure to exhaust administrative remedies and issued a strike against him in each 9 case. C11-5755-BHS/KLS and C11-5680-RBL/KLS. On March 26, 2012, Judge Ronald 10 B. Leighton adopted Magistrate Judge Strombom’s report and recommendations in case 11 C11-5680-RBL/KLS. To avoid another adverse ruling and a third strike in a case also 12 involving the filing of a grievance, Richey moved to voluntarily dismiss the instant suit 13 because he assumed that Magistrate Judge Strombom would again rule against him. Dkt. 14 10 at 1-5. 15 However, on March 28, 2012, after Richey filed the motion to dismiss his case, 16 this Court issued an order declining to adopt Magistrate Judge Strombom’s R&R in case 17 C11-5775-BHS/KLS. C11-5755-BHS/KLS, Dkt. 22 at 2 and 3. In ruling on the R&R, 18 this Court found, in relevant part, that Richey’s (1) “grievance was ‘withdrawn’ instead 19 of denied, which makes his grievance not subject to appeal, and (2) the subsequent 20 grievance was typed, not handwritten, and only contains the grievance manager’s 21 signature.” Id. at 2. 22 ORDER - 2 Thus, the Court determined that failure to exhaust administrative 1 remedies was not a proper basis on which to dismiss Richey’s case, and declined to adopt 2 Judge Strombom’s R&R. Id.. 3 Once this Court issued the aforementioned ruling, it appears that Richey’s 4 understanding of the law and his concern with facing a third strike changed. Richey now 5 wishes to proceed with his case against D. Dahne. Therefore, he filed the instant motion 6 objecting to Judge Strombom’s R&R granting his voluntary withdrawal and requesting 7 that this Court withdraw his prior motion to dismiss his case. 8 This Court finds that Richey’s request to withdraw his motion to dismiss should be 9 granted. 10 Therefore, it is hereby ORDERED that 11 (1) The Court declines to adopt the R&R (Dkt. 9); and 12 (2) Richey’s request to withdraw his motion to dismiss his 13 complaint (Dkt. 10) is GRANTED; and 14 (3) 15 16 This matter is re-referred to Magistrate Judge Strombom for further proceedings. Dated this 31st day of May, 2012. A 17 18 BENJAMIN H. SETTLE United States District Judge 19 20 21 22 ORDER - 3

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?