Jones v. Edmonds Police

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE

CORTEZ DAUNDRE JONES, CASE NO. C23-1194JLR Plaintiff, ORDER v. EDMONDS POLICE, Defendant.

Before the court are (1) pro se Plaintiff Cortez Daundre Jones’s motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP”) (IFP App. (Dkt. # 1)) and (2) United States Magistrate Judge Brian A. Tsuchida’s report and recommendation recommending the court deny Mr. Jones’s IFP motion (R&R (Dkt. # 2)).1 Having carefully reviewed the

1 Although the report and recommendation states that Mr. Jones is permitted to file objections to the report and recommendation by August 23, 2023, 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.2d 1113, 1114 (9th Cir. 1998). Accordingly, the court will not afford Mr. Jones an opportunity to object to the instant report and recommendation. foregoing documents and the governing law, the court ADOPTS the report and recommendation (Dkt. # 2) and DENIES Mr. Jones’s motion for leave to proceed IFP

(Dkt. # 1). Mr. Jones shall pay the usual filing fee by September 14, 2023. If he fails to do so, this case will be dismissed. Dated this 15th day of August, 2023. A United States District Judge