From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Marks v. Giles

United States District Court, W.D. Washington, at Tacoma
Nov 3, 2009
Case No. C07-5572RJB/JRC (W.D. Wash. Nov. 3, 2009)

Opinion

Case No. C07-5572RJB/JRC.

November 3, 2009


ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION


This matter comes before the Court on the Report and Recommendation of U. S. Magistrate Judge J. Richard Creatura. Dkt. 71. The Court has considered the Report and Recommendation, objections to the Report and Recommendation, if any, and the record.

Plaintiff filed this 42 U.S.C. 1983/Bivens action on October 17, 2007. Dkt. 1. At the time he filed suit, Plaintiff was incarcerated at the Northwest Detention Center ("NDC"), but has now been released. Dkt. 58. Plaintiff asserted claims against employees of GEO, a contractor at the NDC, and federal employees. Dkt. 1. Defendants Alisha Singleton, Charles McBurney, and George Wigen (employees of GEO) were dismissed by stipulation on January 9, 2008. Dkt. 12.

On September 24, 2008, all Plaintiff's claims against the remaining Defendants, federal employees Tom Giles, SDO Ruxhall, and Jack Bennett, were dismissed except his Eighth Amendment claim challenging the conditions of his confinement. Dkt. 28.

Parties then engaged in discovery. See e. g. Dkt. 67. On July 22, 2009, the remaining Defendants filed a Motion for Summary Judgment. Dkt. 60. The Motion for Summary Judgment was noted for August 14, 2009. Id. Plaintiff did not file a response, and so by order of the Court, Plaintiff was given an extension of time to file a response, and the Motion for Summary Judgment was renoted for September 18, 2009. Dkt. 68. On August 25, 2009, rather than file a response to the Motion for Summary Judgment, Plaintiff filed a Motion for Reconsideration of Order Denying Motion to Compel. Dkt. 69. His Motion for Reconsideration was denied. Dkt. 70.

On October 5, 2009, the instant Report and Recommendation was filed, recommending that the Court grant Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment and dismiss the remaining claim. Dkt. 71. Although he has been given ample time to do so, Plaintiff has not filed a response.

Upon review of the Report and Recommendation (Dkt. 71) the Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment should be granted and the remaining claim dismissed with prejudice.

Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED:

• The Report and Recommendation (Dkt. 71) is ADOPTED;
• Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment (Dkt. 60) is GRANTED;
• The remaining claim is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE;
• This case is CLOSED; and
• The Clerk is directed to send copies of this Order to Plaintiff, all counsel of record, and to the Hon. J. Richard Creatura.


Summaries of

Marks v. Giles

United States District Court, W.D. Washington, at Tacoma
Nov 3, 2009
Case No. C07-5572RJB/JRC (W.D. Wash. Nov. 3, 2009)
Case details for

Marks v. Giles

Case Details

Full title:ANTOLIN ANDREW MARKS, Plaintiff, v. MARK GILES, et al., Defendants

Court:United States District Court, W.D. Washington, at Tacoma

Date published: Nov 3, 2009

Citations

Case No. C07-5572RJB/JRC (W.D. Wash. Nov. 3, 2009)