Arenas v. Inslee et al

Filing 54

ORDER ON DEFENDANTS' MOTION TO DISMISS AND FOR RELIEF FROM DEADLINES, granting 43 Motion to Dismiss; denying as moot 46 Motion to Compel; denying as moot 47 Motion to Appoint Counsel; denying as moot 53 Motion. Signed by Judge Robert J. Bryan. Paper copy sent to plaintiff at Mount Vernon address. (JL)

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

8
9
10
11
12
13
14

SILVERIO ARENAS, JR.,
Plaintiff,
v.
JAY INSLEE, et al.,

CASE NO. 3:19-cv-05339-RJB
ORDER ON DEFENDANTS’
MOTION TO DISMISS AND FOR
RELIEF FROM DEADLINES

Defendants.

15
16

This matter comes before the Court on Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss and for Relief

17

from Deadlines (Dkt. 43). The Court has considered documents filed in support of and in

18

opposition to the motion, the remaining file, and the file in Western District of Washington

19

Bankruptcy Court Adversary Case No. 19-01134-MLB. The Court is fully informed.

20

In the pending motion, Defendants move to dismiss or consider this matter resolved

21

because it has already been adjudicated by the Bankruptcy Court and on appeal. For the reasons

22

set forth in this Order, Defendants’ motion should be granted, all remaining pending motions

23

should be denied as moot, and this case should be dismissed.

24

ORDER ON DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS AND FOR RELIEF FROM DEADLINES - 1

I.

1

BACKGROUND

2

The relevant facts are detailed in the United States Bankruptcy Appellate Panel’s

3

(“BAP”) Memorandum on the parties’ motions for summary judgment, Case No. 21-1056, Dkt.

4

18. Dkt. 44 at 40; see Western District of Washington Bankruptcy Case No. 19-01134-MLB,

5

Dkt. 105. The relevant procedural history is recited below.

6

Plaintiff proceeding pro se, Dr. Silvio Arenas, Jr., filed his original complaint on April

7

26, 2019, and an amended complaint on July 26, 2019. Dkts. 3 and 9. On October 13, 2019, the

8

Court reassigned Dr. Arenas’ case to the Western District of Washington Bankruptcy Court as

9

Adversary Case No. 19-01134-MLB because Plaintiff had a pending Chapter 13 Bankruptcy

10

proceeding, Case No. 17-10940-MLB. Dkt. 36. In a notice of trial and order setting deadlines,

11

the bankruptcy court notified the parties that, as set forth in Western District of Washington

12

Local Bankruptcy Rule 7012-1(c), “failure by a party to file a Notice Regarding Final

13

Adjudication and Consent . . . shall constitute that party’s consent to entry of final orders or

14

judgments by the bankruptcy judge.” Dkt. 44, Exh. 2. On February 6, 2020, plaintiff and

15

defendants each filed separate Notices of Regarding Final Adjudication and Consent, in which

16

they expressly consented to the entry of final orders and judgment by the bankruptcy court. Id.,

17

Exhs. 3 at 4.

18

Defendants moved for summary judgment before the bankruptcy court, arguing that

19

dismissal was appropriate under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6), because Dr. Arenas

20

failed to plead necessary facts to establish or provide any evidence to support his claims, and

21

because Eleventh Amendment immunity precluded claims against the state officials in their

22

official capacities. Dkt. 44 at 45. The bankruptcy court considered Defendants’ motion and

23

heard oral argument. Id. Though Dr. Arenas did not respond in opposition to Defendants’

24

ORDER ON DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS AND FOR RELIEF FROM DEADLINES - 2

1

motion for summary judgment, the bankruptcy court permitted him to speak at oral argument.

2

Id. The bankruptcy court noted that the claims were difficult to analyze because there were so

3

many and because Dr. Arenas did not tie his asserted facts to the relevant claims. Id. at 46.

4

Nonetheless, the bankruptcy court ruled that summary judgment was appropriate because Dr.

5

Arenas failed to contest evidence provided by Defendants and that certain claims should be

6

dismissed under Rule 12(b)(6) because Dr. Arenas failed to state a claim for which relief could

7

be granted. Id. The court entered judgment in Defendants’ favor. Id.

8

Dr. Arenas moved for reconsideration of the bankruptcy court’s order granting summary

9

judgment and, before the court entered its order denying reconsideration, appealed to the BAP.

10

Id. The BAP affirmed the bankruptcy court’s order granting Defendants’ motion for summary

11

judgment and dismissing Dr. Arenas’ claims. Id. at 53. Dr. Arenas is currently appealing the

12

BAP decision to the Ninth Circuit, United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit Case No.

13

21-60062. Dkt. 44, Exh. 7.
II.

14
15
16
17

DISCUSSION

Defendants’ motion to dismiss should be granted because Dr. Arenas’ claims have
already been litigated in the bankruptcy court.
Under 28 U.S.C. § 158(c)(1), appeal of a final judgment entered by bankruptcy court

18

“shall be heard by a 3-judge paned of the bankruptcy appellate panel service . . . unless . . . the

19

appellant elects at the time of filing the appeal . . . to have such appeal heard by the district

20

court.” See also Fed. R. Bankr. P. 8005, Election to Have an Appeal Heard by the District Court

21

Instead of the BAP.

22

As outlined above, Dr. Arenas litigated his claims in the Bankruptcy Court. He had the

23

option of appealing that judgment to district court under 28 U.S.C. § 158(c)(1), but he appealed

24

ORDER ON DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS AND FOR RELIEF FROM DEADLINES - 3

1

to the BAP instead. The BAP heard his appeal and affirmed the Bankruptcy Court’s order.

2

Therefore, this matter has been resolved and the Court does not have jurisdiction to further

3

litigate Dr. Arenas’ claims. Other than a notice of appeal, further pleadings filed in this case will

4

be filed by the clerk of the court but no further action will be taken.
III.

5
6
7

ORDER

Therefore, it is hereby ORDERED that:


8

Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss and for Relief from Deadlines (Dkt. 43) IS
GRANTED;

9



This case IS CLOSED;

10



All other pending motions (Dkts. 46, 47, 53) ARE DENIED as moot;

11



Other than a notice of appeal, further pleadings filed in this case will be filed by

12
13
14
15
16
17
18

the clerk of the court but no further action will be taken.
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.
Dated this 29th day of July, 2022.

A
ROBERT J. BRYAN
United States District Judge

19
20
21
22
23
24

ORDER ON DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS AND FOR RELIEF FROM DEADLINES - 4