Harleman v. Warden

• Court: District Court, W.D. Washington
• Decided: January 29, 2025
• Docket: 2:24-cv-02176
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT TACOMA 6 7 PAUL HENRI MARIE HARLEMAN, CASE NO. 2:24-cv-02176-TMC-GJL 8 Petitioner, v. ORDER DENYING EXTENSION 9 AS MOOT AND STRIKING WARDEN, FDC SEATAC, IMPROPER SUPPLEMENT 10 Respondent. 11 12 This federal habeas action filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241 has been referred to United 13 States Magistrate Judge Grady J. Leupold. Currently before the Court is Respondent’s Motion 14 for Extension of Time to File a Return in light of Petitioner’s Supplement to the Petition. Dkt. 7 15 (Motion); Dkt. 5 (Supplement to Petition). For the reasons explained below, Petitioner’s 16 Supplement to the Petition is STRICKEN for failure to comply with Rule 15(d) of the Federal 17 Rules of Civil Procedure and Respondent’s Motion for Extension of Time is DENIED as moot. 18 I. BACKGROUND 19 Petitioner initiated this action by filing a § 2241 habeas Petition on December 12, 2024.1 20 Dkt. 1. The Court directed service upon Respondent on January 7, 2025, and ordered that 21 Respondent file a Return and memorandum in support not later than thirty days after service. 22 Dkt. 4. Approximately two weeks later and without leave of Court, Petitioner filed a Supplement 23 1 Although Petitioner filed his Petition on December 12, 2024, the Petition was not entered on the docket until 24 January 2, 2025. See docket. 1 to the Petition, raising new claims and alleging unlawful retaliation, legal mail issues, improper 2 calculation of Petitioner’s PATTERN score, and an erroneous risk needs assessment. Dkt. 5. On 3 January 27, 2025, Respondent moved for an extension of time to file a Return, arguing additional 4 time was needed to respond to the new claims and allegations raised in Petitioner’s Supplement.

5 Dkt. 7. 6 II. DISCUSSION 7 Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15(a)(1), a party may amend their pleading once 8 as a matter of right within 21 days of service of the pleading or, if the pleading requires a 9 responsive pleading, within 21 days of service of the responsive pleading or a motion under Rule 10 12(b), (e), or (f), whichever is earlier. An amended pleading is a complete substitute, not a 11 supplement, for the initial pleading. Ramirez v. Cnty. of San Bernardino, 806 F.3d 1002, 1008 12 (9th Cir. 2015) (“It is well-established in our circuit that an amended complaint supersedes the 13 original, the latter being treated thereafter as non-existent.”) (internal quotation and citation 14 omitted).

15 Supplemental pleadings, on the other hand, are governed by Rule 15(d) of the Federal 16 Rules of Civil Procedure. Rule 15(d) permits the filing of supplemental pleadings “setting out 17 any transaction, occurrence, or event that happened after the date of the pleading to be 18 supplemented,” but only “on motion and reasonable notice.” Id. (emphasis added). A party 19 moving to file a supplemental pleading must show just cause for doing so. Id. 20 Petitioner has characterized his new pleading as a Supplement to the Petition, but he 21 neither sought leave of the Court nor demonstrated just cause for supplementing his Petition. See 22 Dkt. 5. As such, the new pleading violates Rule 15(d) and is STRICKEN. In addition, Petitioner 23 is ADVISED that adherence to procedural rules is essential for the orderly and fair resolution of

24 this action. 1 Turning to the instant Motion, Respondent seeks additional time to file the Return in light 2 of Petitioner’s Supplement to the Petition. Id. As stated, Petitioner’s Supplement to the Petition 3 was improperly filed and is stricken from the record. As a result, Respondent’s Motion for 4 Extension of Time is DENIED as moot.

5 III. CONCLUSION 6 Accordingly, Petitioner’s Supplement to the Petition (Dkt. 5) is STRICKEN from the 7 record for failure to comply with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15(d), and Respondent’s 8 Motion for Extension of Time to File a Return (Dkt. 7) is DENIED as moot. 9 The Clerk of Court is DIRECTED to STRIKE Petitioner’s Supplement to the Petition 10 (Dkt. 5) on the docket. 11 Dated this 29th day of January, 2025. 12 A 13 14 Grady J. Leupold United States Magistrate Judge 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24