1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

Page - 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

AT TACOMA

VISHAL SINGH UPPAL,

Plaintiff,

v.

JOSEPH WILLIES et al.,

Defendants,

Case No. C06-5167FDB

REPORT AND

 RECOMMENDATION

 

 NOTED FOR:

July 20, 2007

This 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights/Bivens action has been referred to the undersigned Magistrate

Judge pursuant to Title 28 U.S.C. §§ 636(b)(1)(A) and 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Magistrates' Rules MJR 1, MJR

3, and MJR 4. Before the court is defendant’s untimely motion to dismiss (Dkt. # 35). Although the motion is 

untimely, defendants present good cause for delay in filing the motion. The court recommends dismissal

without prejudice as it appears plaintiff has abandoned the action.

This action originally contested conditions of confinement at the Northwest Detention Center. Despite

this being a Civil Rights action, plaintiff filed no less than three motions attempting to stay his deportation to

India. Plaintiff attempted to use the action to try to challenge ongoing deportation proceedings.

Plaintiff was deported to India on October 31, 2006. Other than filing a notice of change of address he

has not filed any pleadings in this action. 

Case 3:06-cv-05167-FDB Document 37 Filed 06/14/07 Page 1 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

Page - 2

Plaintiff took no steps to file a joint status report which was due June 1, 2007 (Dkt. # 12). Further,

plaintiff has not responded to defendant’s motion to dismiss. Local Rule 7 (b)(2) states:

(2) Obligation of Opponent. Each party opposing the motion shall. Within the time

prescribed in CR 7(d) file with the clerk, and serve on each party that has appeared in the action

a brief in opposition to the motion with any supporting materials of the type described in

subsection (1). If a party fails to file papers in opposition to a motion, such failure may be

considered by the court as a admission that the motion has merit. 

Plaintiff’s failure to file any response to the motion to dismiss or object to the filing of the motion

militates toward dismissal of the case. In addition, since filing a notice of change of address, plaintiff has not

taken steps to prosecute this action and did not take the steps needed to file a joint status report. The court

therefore recommends this action be DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. A proposed order

accompanies this Report and Recommendation. 

Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) and Rule 72(b) of the Federal rules of Civil Procedure, the

parties shall have ten (10) days from service of this Report to file written objections. See also Fed. R. Civ.

P. 6. Failure to file objections will result in a waiver of those objections for purposes of appeal. Thomas v.

Arn, 474 U.S. 140 (1985). Accommodating the time limit imposed by Rule 72(b), the clerk is directed to

set the matter for consideration on July 20, 2007, as noted in the caption. 

DATED this 14 day of June, 2007.

/S/ J. Kelley Arnold

J. Kelley Arnold

United States Magistrate Judge

Case 3:06-cv-05167-FDB Document 37 Filed 06/14/07 Page 2 of 2