Opinion
2:22-cv-01527-JHC
01-17-2023
WALTER G. HAYDEN, JR. Plaintiff, v. CALI KNIGHT, Executive Director External Relations; GAIL STONE, Law and Justice Policy Senior Advisor; MICHAEL PADILLA, External Relations Associate; CLAUDIA BALDUCCI, King County Council; ROD DEMBOWSKI, King County Council; ZAHILAY GIRMAY, King County Council; AMY CALDERWOOD, Director of King County Ombudsman's Office; LUKE OH, Deputy, King Ombuds Office; JONATHAN STIER, Senior Deputy, King County Ombuds Office; BRUCE HARRELL, Mayor of Seattle; KING COUNTY; CITY OF SEATTLE & MUNICIPALITY, Governmental Agencies and Agents, Defendants.
ORDER
JOHN H. CHUN United States District Judge
This matter comes before the Court on pro se Plaintiff's “Judgement & Summary.” Dkt. # 10. To the extent this document is a motion for summary judgment, it patently lacks merit. Notably, Plaintiff did not submit any evidence in support of any motion. Defendants filed an opposition to the motion. Dkt. # 13. Plaintiff filed what appear to be two “amendments” to the “Judgement & Summary.” Dkt. ## 14 & 16. But neither document appears to reply to Defendants' arguments; nor do they otherwise provide a basis for granting summary judgment in Plaintiff's favor. Accordingly, to the extent that Dkt. # 10 is a motion for summary judgment, the Court DENIES it.