Butsch v. Bennett

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE

CLAYTON E. BUTSCH, CASE NO. C24-0482JLR-BAT Petitioner, ORDER v. JASON BENNETT, Respondent.

Before the court are (1) pro se Petitioner Clayton E. Butsch’s motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP”) (IFP Mot. (Dkt. # 1)) and (2) United States Magistrate Judge Brian A. Tsuchida’s report and recommendation recommending that the court deny Mr. Butsch’s IFP motion (R&R (Dkt. # 4)).1 Having carefully reviewed the foregoing

1 Although the report and recommendation states that Mr. Butsch is permitted to file objections by no later than April 29, 2024 (see id. at 2), the Ninth Circuit has held that a plaintiff is not entitled to submit written objections to a Magistrate Judge’s report and recommendation that IFP status should be denied, Minetti v. Port of Seattle, 152 F.3d 1113, 1114 (9th Cir. 1998). Accordingly, the court will not afford Mr. Butsch an opportunity to object to the instant report and recommendation. documents, the supporting materials, and the governing law, the court ADOPTS the report and recommendation (Dkt. # 4) and DENIES Mr. Butsch’s motion for leave to

proceed IFP (Dkt. # 1). Mr. Butsch shall pay the usual $5.00 filing fee by no later than April 30, 2024. If he fails to do so, this matter will be dismissed without prejudice. Dated this 16th day of April, 2024. A United States District Judge