From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Wash. Health Care Auth. v. Azar

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT TACOMA
Jan 7, 2021
Case No. C19-6137 BHS-TLF (W.D. Wash. Jan. 7, 2021)

Opinion

Case No. C19-6137 BHS-TLF

01-07-2021

STATE OF WASHINGTON HEALTH CARE AUTHORITY, Plaintiff, v. ALEX M AZAR II, Defendants.


REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION Noted for January 22, 2021

On October 29, 2020, the Court dismissed plaintiff's complaint against the "Hospital Defendants" for lack of subject matter jurisdiction with leave to amend. Dkt. 52. The Court re-referred this matter to the undersigned to set a deadline to file the amended complaint. Dkt. 52. On November 3, 2020, the Court issued an order setting the deadline to file amended complaint for December 17, 2020. Dkt. 53.

The Hospital Defendants are Kadlec Regional Medical Center, King County Public Hospital District No. 2, Providence Centralia Hospital, Providence Holy Family Hospital, Providence Mount Carmel Hospital, Providence Regional Medical Center Everett, Providence Sacred Heart Medical Center, Providence St. Mary Medical Center, Providence St. Peter Hospital, Snohomish County Public Hospital District No. 1, Swedish Medical Center Cherry Hill, Swedish Medical Center Edmonds, Swedish Medical Center First Hill/Ballard, Swedish Medical Center Issaquah, and Seattle Children's Hospital.

Plaintiff has not filed an amended complaint. On December 29, 2020, the undersigned issued an Order to Show Cause directing plaintiff to show cause why plaintiff's complaint against the Hospital Defendants should not be dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction and failure to prosecute. Dkt. 54. Plaintiff has informed the Court that plaintiff does not object to the dismissal of this action without prejudice. Dkt 55.

Based on the foregoing, the undersigned recommends that the Court dismiss this action without prejudice for lack of subject matter jurisdiction and for failure to prosecute.

The parties have fourteen (14) days from service of this Report and Recommendation to file written objections thereto. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); FRCP 6; FRCP 72(b)(2). Failure to file objections will result in a waiver of those objections for purposes of appeal. Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140 (1985). If objections are filed, the parties shall have fourteen (14) days from the service of the objections to file a response. FRCP 72(b)(2). Accommodating this time limitation, this matter shall be set for consideration on January 22, 2021, as noted in the caption.

Dated this 7th day of January, 2021.

/s/_________

Theresa L. Fricke

United States Magistrate Judge


Summaries of

Wash. Health Care Auth. v. Azar

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT TACOMA
Jan 7, 2021
Case No. C19-6137 BHS-TLF (W.D. Wash. Jan. 7, 2021)
Case details for

Wash. Health Care Auth. v. Azar

Case Details

Full title:STATE OF WASHINGTON HEALTH CARE AUTHORITY, Plaintiff, v. ALEX M AZAR II…

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT TACOMA

Date published: Jan 7, 2021

Citations

Case No. C19-6137 BHS-TLF (W.D. Wash. Jan. 7, 2021)