Davis v. Washington State Department of Corrections et al

Filing 125

ORDER Extending Deadline for Objections by Judge Benjamin H. Settle re 119 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS. 121 OBJECTIONS by Plaintiff Keith Adair Davis to 119 Report and Recommendations: RENOTED to 9/15/2017. **2 PAGE(S), PRINT ALL**(Keith Davis, Prisoner ID: 936379)(TG)

1
2

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON
AT TACOMA

3
4

KEITH ADAIR DAVIS,

5
6
7
8

Plaintiff,
v.
WASHINGTON STATE
DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS,
et al.,

11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20

ORDER EXTENDING DEADLINE
FOR OBJECTIONS TO THE
REPORT AND
RECOMMENDATION UNTIL
SEPTEMBER 15, 2017

Defendants.

9
10

CASE NO. C16-5129 BHS

This matter comes before the Court on the Report and Recommendation (“R&R”)
of the Honorable David W. Christel, United States Magistrate Judge (Dkt. 119), and
Plaintiff’s objections to the R&R (Dkt. 121).
The background and procedural history of this case is adequately set forth in the
R&R. See Dkt. 119 at 2. The R&R was entered on July 25, 2017. Dkt. 119. On August 4,
2017, Plaintiff filed a motion for reconsideration, or “objections” to the R&R, with a
supporting declaration. Dkts. 121, 122.
The district judge must determine de novo any part of the magistrate judge’s
disposition that has been properly objected to. The district judge may accept, reject, or
modify the recommended disposition; receive further evidence; or return the matter to the
magistrate judge with instructions. Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(3).

21
22

ORDER - 1

1

Plaintiff has not raised an actual objection to any aspect of the R&R. See Dkt. 121.

2

Instead, Plaintiff complains that he has only received a cover sheet and one page of the

3

R&R at the facility in which he is incarcerated, and that he has a pending grievance to

4

obtain the remaining pages. Id. at 3–4. He has also listed factors allegedly contributing to

5

his failure to timely participate in proceedings before Judge Christel. Id. at 2–4. It should

6

be noted, however, that Judge Christel excused the untimeliness of Plaintiff’s filings in

7

opposition to summary judgment and gave them due consideration. See Dkt. 119 at 2 n.2.

8

Also worth noting is the fact that, on August 22, 2017, after the filing of his “objection”

9

to the R&R, Plaintiff was again relocated by the Washington Department of Corrections.

10
11

Dkt. 123.
Due to Plaintiff’s statements that he has not yet received the R&R, the Court will

12

extend his deadline for filing objections to the R&R until September 15, 2017. Plaintiff’s

13

motion for reconsideration of the R&R (Dkt. 121) will be terminated and the R&R will

14

be re-noted for September 15, 2017. Failure to properly object to the R&R by that date

15

will result in the Court adopting the R&R, entering judgment in favor of Defendants, and

16

closing the case.

17

IT IS SO ORDERED.

18

Dated this 30th day of August, 2017.

A

19
20

BENJAMIN H. SETTLE
United States District Judge

21
22

ORDER - 2