Johnson v. Electronic Transaction Consultants Corporation et al

Filing 19

RULING ON OBJECTIONS by Judge Robert J. Bryan. Paper copy sent to Plaintiff at Tacoma address. (TC)

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

8
9
10
11
12
13
14

BRENDA M. JOHNSON,
Plaintiff,
v.

CASE NO. 3:17-cv-06009-RJB
RULING ON OBJECTIONS

ELECTRONIC TRANSACTION
CONSTULTANTS CORPORATION, et
al.,

15

Defendants.

16
17
18
19
20
21
22

THIS MATTER comes before the Court upon review of the file.
On February 20, 2018, the Court issued an Order Denying Motion for Leave to Proceed
In Forma Pauperis. Dkt. 17. The Order denied Plaintiff’s motion to litigate at the Court’s
expense, because “this case appears to be barred by the statute of limitations . . . and is futile[.]”
Dkt. 17 at 1. The Order provided a deadline of March 20, 2018 for Plaintiff to pay the filing fee,
or face dismissal without prejudice. Id.

23
24

RULING ON OBJECTIONS - 1

1

On February 27, 2018, Plaintiff filed a pleading objecting to the Order. Dkt. 18. The

2

header to the pleading reads: “Rule 46. Objecting to a Ruling or Order on IFP.” Dkt. 18 at 1.

3

Although unclear, it appears that Plaintiff argues that the Court erred in denying her motion for

4

IFP, because Plaintiff filed all documents sufficient to initiate a case, including the complaint,

5

certificate of service, and jury demand. Id. at 2. Plaintiff also states that she has financial

6

hardships, and she requests that this matter be “consolidated” with an EEOC complaint. Id. at 1,

7

2.

8
9

Although the Court is under no obligation to consider the merits of Plaintiff’s objections
because they were not properly raised in a motion for reconsideration or otherwise, the Court has

10

considered the merits of Plaintiff’s objections. The objections are duly noted, but they do not

11

change the Court’s view of the underlying merits of Complaint, as articulated in the Order.

12
13

The Clerk is directed to send uncertified copies of this Order to all counsel of record and
to any party appearing pro se at said party’s last known address.

14
15

Dated this 1st day of March, 2018.

A

16
17

ROBERT J. BRYAN
United States District Judge

18
19
20
21
22
23
24

RULING ON OBJECTIONS - 2