Opinion
CASE NO. C11-1667 MJP
03-19-2013
CHARLES DANIEL JR., Plaintiff, v. TODD FREDRICKSEN, Defendant.
ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO
FILE OVERLENGTH BRIEF AND
ADOPTING REPORT AND
RECOMMENDATION
THIS MATTER comes before the Court on Defendant's motion to dismiss (Dkt. No. 44), Plaintiff's response (Dkt. No. 48), the Report and Recommendation of the Honorable James P. Donohue, United States Magistrate Judge (Dkt. No. 49), Plaintiff's motion to file over length objections (Dkt. No. 71), and Plaintiff's objections to the Report and Recommendation (Dkt. NO. 71-1). The Court GRANTS Plaintiff's motion to file over length objections, and has considered the objections in full. The Court, having reviewed all relevant documents, ADOPTS the Report and Recommendations.
Plaintiff argues in his objections his time barred claims should be subject to equitable tolling because his case presents extraordinary circumstances. (Dkt. No. 71-1 at 9.) He raises concerns the timing of Defendants in responding to his administrative complaints was in bad faith and a deliberate attempt to run the statue of limitations on his claims. (Id.) Plaintiff offers no factual support for the bad faith claim. Plaintiff's arguments do not undercut Judge Donohue's argument that Plaintiff could have filed his constitutional claims at the conclusion of his administrative process in October 2007. (Dkt. No. 69 at 11.) Plaintiff's arguments do not support a finding of extraordinary circumstances requiring equitable tolling.
Plaintiff also argues his conspiracy claim should remain active due to circumstantial evidence. (Dkt. No. 71-1 at 11.) He argues it is improbable that various Department of Corrections employees would mishandle property with respect to the same inmate at different facilities over a period of 6 years. (Id. at 11-12.) The Report and Recommendation adequately addresses this issue. (Dkt. No. 69 at 10.) The allegedly conspiratorial events took place over three years apart and involve staff at three separate facilities. (Id.) The fact that all facilities were Washington Department of Corrections Facilities is not enough to infer a conspiracy, and Plaintiff alleges no specific facts to support a meeting of the minds. (Id.)
Finally, Plaintiff continues to argue he was not supplied with a rejection notice for his mail and this was a violation of policy and delayed his ability to take certain legal actions. (Dkt. No. 71 at 7.) The Report and Recommendation addresses this when it notes no rejection notice was given because Plaintiff's mail was never actually rejected, rather, it was mishandled at most. (Dkt. No. 69 at 14.)
The Court agrees with and ADOPTS the conclusions of the Report and Recommendation. The Court hereby ORDERS:
(1) The Court GRANTS Plaintiff's motion to file over length objections to the Report and Recommendation (Dkt. No. 71) and has considered the objections in full.
(2) The Court adopts the Report and Recommendation.
(3) The Washington State Department of Corrections defendants' motion to dismiss (Dkt. No. 44) is GRANTED.
(4) Plaintiff's complaint (Dkt. No. 13) and this action are DISMISSED with prejudice.
(5) The Clerk is ordered to provide copies of this Order to Plaintiff, to counsel for defendants, and to Judge Donohue.
______________
Marsha J. Pechman
Chief United States District Judge