Preston v. SB&C Ltd

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE MIKRAE E. PRESTON, CASE NO. 2:24-cv-01589-LK Plaintiff, ORDER REQUESTING v. SUPPLEMENTAL BRIEFING SB&C, LTD aka SKAGIT BONDED COLLECTOR, L.L.C., Defendant. This matter comes before the Court sua sponte. The Court requests supplemental briefing regarding whether this action must be dismissed—in whole or in part—based on the Rooker- Feldman doctrine. That doctrine prevents federal district courts “from exercising appellate jurisdiction over final state-court judgments,” Lance v. Dennis, 546 U.S. 459, 463 (2006), and, as such, bars federal lawsuits “complaining of injuries caused by state-court judgments rendered before the district court proceedings commenced and inviting district court review and rejection of those judgments,” Roberts v. WMC Mortg. Corp., 341 F. App'x 293, 294 (9th Cir. 2009) (citation omitted). When the doctrine applies, “the federal complaint must be dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.” Bianchi v. Rylaarsdam, 334 F.3d 895, 898 (9th Cir. 2003). Here, Plaintiff asks the Court to, among other things, enter an injunction “requiring Defendant to apply Charity Care to class members even if Defendant has obtained a [state court] judgment against those members,” and “to vacate all judgments against class members where Defendant has violated

RCW 19.16.250 and .260, to vacate all judgments obtained against class members where Defendant has failed to advised them in its initial compliant of their right to apply for Charity Care, and to vacate all judgments obtained against class members.” Dkt. No. 1-1 at 17–18. Plaintiff’s supplemental brief is due by April 10, 2025, and Defendant’s supplemental brief is due by April 17, 2025. Both submissions are limited to 2,800 words. Dated this 27th day of March, 2025. A Lauren King United States District Judge