Frick v. Dy

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE Plaintiff, Case No. C22-801-JHC-MLP v. ORDER DR. DY, et al., Defendants.

This is a prisoner civil rights action proceeding under Bivens v. Six Unknown Federal Narcotics Agents, 403 U.S. 388 (1971). This matter is before the Court on Plaintiff Christopher Frick’s “Motion for Time to File Surreply to Defendants[’] Reply” (“Plaintiff’s Motion”). (Dkt. # 71.) Plaintiff’s Motion requests time to file a “surreply” to Defendants’ pending motion to dismiss because Plaintiff is awaiting grievance records from the Federal Detention Center-SeaTac (“FDC SeaTac”).1 (Id. at 1.) Defendants did not file a response. Plaintiff argues that he needs the grievance records to rebut Defendants’ account that he has failed to exhaust his administrative remedies with respect to his claims in this action. (Dkt. 1 Though Plaintiff has requested time to file a surreply, pursuant to this Court’s Local Civil Rules (“LCR”), a surreply is limited to motions to strike material contained in or attached to a reply brief. See LCR 7(g). The Court will therefore construe Plaintiff’s Motion as a request to file a supplement to his previous response to Defendants’ motion to dismiss. # 71 at 1; see also dkt. # 59.) Plaintiff additionally notes that he has several medical appointments this month, with some requiring anesthesia, and that he will need time to recover before filing. (Dkt. # 71 at 1.) Given the arguments made by Plaintiff in his motion, and Defendants’ lack of opposition

to Plaintiff’s request, the Court finds that a brief period of time to allow Plaintiff to receive grievance records from FDC SeaTac, and to supplement his previous response to Defendants’ motion to dismiss, is appropriate. Accordingly, the Court GRANTS Plaintiff’s Motion (dkt. # 71). Plaintiff shall file his supplemental response to Defendants’ motion to dismiss by April 10, 2023. The Clerk is directed to RE-NOTE the parties’ pending motions (dkt. ## 59, 63, 68) for the Court’s consideration on April 14, 2023. Defendants may file a supplemental reply to Plaintiff’s supplemental response not later than the noting date. Dated this 23rd day of March, 2023. A United States Magistrate Judge