Scott v. Pacific County et al Doc.

2
Case 3:05-cv-05711-RBL Document 2 Filed 10/26/2005 Page 1 of 2
Case 3:05-mc-05029-RSL Document 5 Filed 10/25/2005 Page 1 of 2

1
2
3
4
5
6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON
7 AT SEATTLE
8 _________________________________
)
9 RICHARD ROY SCOTT, ) No. MS05-5029
)
10 Plaintiff, )
v. ) ORDER PERMITTING CASE TO PROCEED
11 )
PACIFIC COUNTY, et al., )
12 )
Defendants. )
13 _________________________________ )
14 This matter comes before the Court on plaintiff’s “Motion for Reconsideration” of
15 this Court’s determination that the above-captioned matter should not be permitted to proceed.
16 Dkt. # 4. Pursuant to the terms of the “Order Adopting Report and Recommendation,” dated
17 April 5, 2005, plaintiff has submitted a signed affidavit verifying that none of the issues raised in
18 the proposed complaint have been litigated in the past by the plaintiff. Dkt. # 3. Upon review of
19 plaintiff’s affidavit and the record in Scott v. Pacific County, C04-5813RJB, it appears that
20 plaintiff voluntarily dismissed his complaint in C04-5813RJB effective March 25, 2005, eleven
21 days before the United States District Court judges who sit in Tacoma entered an order
22 purporting to dismiss the same action with prejudice.
23 Giving plaintiff every benefit of the ambiguities created by his withdrawal of
24 C04-5813L while the Report and Recommendation was pending, the Court finds that the issues
25 raised in the above-captioned matter have not been finally resolved and may proceed subject to
26

ORDER PERMITTING CASE TO PROCEED

Dockets.Justia.com
 Case 3:05-cv-05711-RBL Document 2 Filed 10/26/2005 Page 2 of 2
Case 3:05-mc-05029-RSL Document 5 Filed 10/25/2005 Page 2 of 2

1 the other requirements imposed by the “Order Adopting Report and Recommendation.”
2
3 DATED this 25th day of October, 2005.

4
5
A
Robert S. Lasnik
6
Chief Judge, United States District Court
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26

ORDER PERMITTING CASE TO PROCEED -2-