Rubio v. Mason County

District Court, W.D. Washington·Decided February 12, 2024·No. 3:23-cv-05435·Unknown

Opinion

WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON BRANDON J. RUBIO, Plaintiff, Case No. C23-5435-JLR-SKV v. SECOND ORDER DIRECTING SERVICE OF CIVIL RIGHTS MASON COUNTY, et al., COMPLAINT Defendants.

Plaintiff proceeds pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. In a previous Order Directing Service, the Court identified Defendants David Guidry, Shannon Slack, Dianne Houldon, Julie Rice, Jennifer Saucier, and Nurse Bre Doe as employees of Mason County Jail. Dkt. 21. Defendant Mason County subsequently informed the Court that these Defendants are employed by Healthcare Delivery Systems, the independently-contracted healthcare provider for Mason County Jail. See Dkt. 42 at 5 (https://healthcaredeliveryinc.com). The Court therefore now ORDERS as follows: (1) Service by Clerk The Clerk is directed to send the following to Healthcare Delivery Systems Defendants David Guidry, Shannon Slack, Dianne Houldon, Julie Rice, Jennifer Saucier, and Nurse Bre Doe: a copy of Plaintiff’s Amended Complaint, Dkt. 20, a copy of this Order, two copies of the notice of lawsuit and request for waiver of service of summons, a waiver of service of summons, and a return envelope, postage prepaid, addressed to the Clerk’s Office. (2) Response Required Defendants shall have thirty (30) days within which to return the enclosed waiver of

service of summons. A defendant who timely returns the signed waiver shall have sixty (60) days after the date designated on the notice of lawsuit to file and serve an answer to the complaint or a motion permitted under Rule 12 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. A defendant who fails to timely return the signed waiver will be personally served with a summons and complaint, and may be required to pay the full costs of such service, pursuant to Rule 4(d)(2) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. A defendant who has been personally served shall file an answer or motion permitted under Rule 12 within twenty-one (21) days after service. (3) Filing and Service by Parties, Generally All attorneys admitted to practice before this Court are required to file documents

electronically via the Court’s CM/ECF system. Counsel are directed to the Court’s website, www.wawd.uscourts.gov, for a detailed description of the requirements for filing via CM/ECF. All non-attorneys, such as pro se parties and/or prisoners, may continue to file a paper original with the Clerk. All filings, whether filed electronically or in traditional paper format, must indicate in the upper right hand corner the name of the magistrate judge to whom the document is directed. For any party filing electronically, when the total of all pages of a filing exceeds fifty (50) pages in length, a paper copy of the document (with tabs or other organizing aids as necessary) shall be delivered to the Clerk’s Office for chambers. The chambers copy must be clearly marked with the words “Courtesy Copy of Electronic Filing for Chambers.” Any document filed with the Court must be accompanied by proof that it has been served upon all parties that have entered a notice of appearance in the underlying matter.

(4) Motions, Generally Any request for court action shall be set forth in a motion, properly filed and served. Pursuant to LCR 7(b), any argument being offered in support of a motion shall be submitted as a part of the motion itself and not in a separate document. The motion shall include in its caption (immediately below the title of the motion) a designation of the date the motion is to be noted for consideration upon the Court’s motion calendar. Stipulated and agreed motions, motions to file over-length motions or briefs, motions for reconsideration, joint submissions pursuant to the option procedure established in LCR 37(a)(2), motions for default, requests for the clerk to enter default judgment, and motions for the court to enter default judgment where the opposing party has not appeared shall be noted for

consideration on the day they are filed. See LCR 7(d)(1). All other non-dispositive motions shall be noted for consideration no earlier than the third Friday following filing and service of the motion. See LCR 7(d)(3). All dispositive motions shall be noted for consideration no earlier than the fourth Friday following filing and service of the motion. Id. For electronic filers, all briefs and affidavits in opposition to either a dispositive or non- dispositive motion shall be filed and served not later than 11:59 p.m. on the Monday immediately preceding the date designated for consideration of the motion. If a party (i.e. a pro se litigant and/or prisoner) files a paper original, that opposition must be received in the Clerk’s office by 4:30 p.m. on the Monday preceding the date of consideration. The party making the motion may file and serve, not later than 11:59 p.m. (if filing electronically) or 4:30 p.m. (if filing a paper original with the Clerk’s office) on the date designated for consideration of the motion, a reply to the opposing party’s briefs and affidavits. (5) Motions to Dismiss and Motions for Summary Judgment

Parties filing motions to dismiss pursuant to Rule 12 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and motions for summary judgment pursuant to Rule 56 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure should acquaint themselves with those rules. As noted above, these motions shall be noted for consideration no earlier than the fourth Friday following filing and service of the motion. Defendants filing motions to dismiss or motions for summary judge are advised that they MUST serve a Rand notice concurrently with motions to dismiss and motions for summary judgment so that pro se prisoner plaintiffs will have fair, timely and adequate notice of what is required of them in order to oppose those motions. Woods v. Carey, 684 F.3d 934, 941 (9th Cir. 2012). The Ninth Circuit has set forth model language for such notices:

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Rubio v. Mason County, (W.D. Wash. 2024).

Rubio v. Mason County (Rubio v. Mason County) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related