Alfarag v. United States Customs and Border Protection

• Court: District Court, W.D. Washington
• Decided: November 8, 2024
• Docket: 2:24-cv-01500
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

1 HONORABLE RICHARD A. JONES

8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE 10 MAJID ALFARAG,

11 Plaintiff, CASE NO. 2:24-cv-01500-RAJ 12 v. ORDER 13 UNITED STATES CUSTOMS AND 14 BORDER PROTECTION and 15 UNITED STATES ATTORNEY FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF 16 WASHINGTON, 17 Defendants. 18

19 This matter comes before the Court on pro se Plaintiff Majid Alfarag 20 (“Plaintiff”)’s Motion for an Extension of Time. Dkt. # 12. No defendants have been 21 served in this action. 22 For the reasons set forth below, the Court DENIES Plaintiff’s Motion. 23 On October 18, 2024, the Court issued a sua sponte Order dismissing Plaintiff’s 24 Complaint with leave to amend. Dkt. # 11. In its Order, the Court noted the myriad 25 deficiencies with Plaintiff’s Complaint. Although the Court deduced that this case 26 1 primarily involves a search by United States Customs and Border Protection (“CBP”), 2 there were no specific factual allegations regarding what actually occurred. As noted in 3 the prior Order, this is a key omission, as CBP may conduct searches without a warrant. 4 See United States v. Seljan, 547 F.3d 993, 1001 (9th Cir. 2008) (“[a] customs officer may 5 stop and search, at the border and without a search warrant, any vehicle, vessel, aircraft, 6 or other conveyance, any envelope or other container, and any person entering or 7 departing from the United States.”) (italics in original) (internal citation omitted). 8 It was also unclear why Plaintiff included the United States Attorney’s Office for 9 the Western District of Washington (the “USAO”) in this case. The Complaint listed the 10 following causes of action: (1) discrimination (Equal Protection Clause); (2) invasion of 11 privacy; (3) defamation; (4) emotional distress; and (5) negligence. Dkt. # 8 at 6. It 12 appears Plaintiff asserted all causes of action except for negligence against CBP only. 13 As it related to the negligence claim, Plaintiff alleged that the USAO failed to address his 14 “formal complaint regarding the unlawful actions of CBP I filed in April 2024,” which 15 he believed constituted a breach of duty. Id. There was no reference to an action filed 16 in April 2024 in the Complaint. Raising further skepticism was that the Complaint was 17 missing two pages. 18 The Court dismissed the Complaint without prejudice and allowed Plaintiff 19 twenty-one (21) days to file an amended pleading, further noting that his failure to do so 20 would result in dismissal of the case. Dkt. # 11 at 4. 21 Plaintiff’s instant Motion asks the Court to grant him a time extension to January 22 2025 “to figure out what I need to do to amend the case.” Dkt. # 12 at 1. He further 23 states, “[t]he reason I’m asking for a longer time is because I don’t have an attorney to 24 help with this case, I [sic] been looking for one since April 2024.” Id. 25 Extensions “always may be asked for, and usually are granted upon a showing of 26 good cause, if timely made.” Ashby v. Mortimer, No. 4:18-cv-00143-DCN, 2019 WL 1 180440, at *2 (D. Idaho Apr. 24, 2019) (citing Creedon v. Taubman, 8 F.R.D. 268, 269 2 (N.D. Ohio 1947)). 3 The Court finds that good cause does not exist to grant Plaintiff’s Motion. Plaintiff 4 concedes he has been searching for an attorney since April 2024, thus raising questions 5 about the merits of his Complaint, about which the Court already expressed its qualms. 6 Given the totality of the circumstances, which includes the Court’s generous granting of 7 twenty-one days to amend the pleading, the high unlikelihood Plaintiff will be able to 8 find an attorney to take his case, and the implausibility any amendment would rectify the 9 discrepancies listed above, the Court denies Plaintiff’s motion. 10 Based on the foregoing reasons, Plaintiff’s Motion for Extension of Time is 11 DENIED. Dkt. # 12. 12 DATED this 8th day of November, 2024. 13

14 A 15 16 The Honorable Richard A. Jones 17 United States District Judge 18 19 20

22 23 24 25 26