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

ORDER OF DISMISSAL

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

AT SEATTLE

_______________________________________)

JAMES DEAN WILKS, ) No. C06-615RSL 

)

Plaintiff, ) ORDER OF DISMISSAL

v. )

)

KING COUNTY, et al., )

)

Defendants. )

__________________________________________)

This matter comes before the Court on the Report and Recommendation of the Honorable

James P. Donohue, United States Magistrate Judge (Dkt. #40). Defendants filed a motion for

partial summary judgment on May 16, 2007 (Dkt. #29) and a motion for summary judgment

(Dkt. #33) on June 18, 2007. Plaintiff failed to respond to these motions. On September 5,

2007, Judge Donohue recommended dismissal of this action with prejudice. See Dkt. #40

(Report and Recommendation). On September 26, 2007, plaintiff filed objections to the Report

and Recommendation. See Dkt. #40. Plaintiff, however, did not substantively respond to

defendants’ motions for summary judgment. Instead, plaintiff moved to remove Judge Donohue

and the undersigned from hearing this case, moved for more time to respond to the motions, and

requested copies of some of the filings in the case. Id. On September 28, 2007, this Court

denied plaintiff’s motion to remove Judge Donohue and on October 10, 2007, the Honorable

Marsha J. Pechman, United States District Judge, denied plaintiff’s motion to remove the

undersigned. See Dkt. ##43, 44.

Case 2:06-cv-00615-RSL Document 49 Filed 12/11/07 Page 1 of 3
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

ORDER OF DISMISSAL -2-

This Court granted plaintiff’s request for copies of the requested documents, granted an

extension of time, and ordered plaintiff to file any objections to the Report and

Recommendation, including his response to defendants’ summary judgment motions, by Friday,

November 30, 2007. See Dkt. #48 (Order Granting Plaintiff’s Request for Extension of Time

and Order Resetting Report and Recommendation). The Court also reset its consideration of the

Report and Recommendation for December 7, 2007 if no objections were filed. After granting

plaintiff’s request for extension of time, plaintiff has failed to file any objections to the Report

and Recommendation or any response to defendants’ motions for summary judgment. 

Accordingly, the Report and Recommendation is now properly before the Court for

consideration.

The Court, after careful review of defendants’ motions for summary judgment in this 42

U.S.C. § 1983 civil rights action, together with all papers in support and opposition to the

motions, Judge Donohue’s Report and Recommendation, and the balance of the record, does

hereby find and ORDER:

(1) The Court adopts the Report and Recommendation concluding that defendants have

met their burden under Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(c) by showing that plaintiff lacks essential evidence to

support his case and defendants are entitled to summary judgment, and concluding that by

failing to substantively respond to defendants’ motions, plaintiff has failed to meet his burden

under Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(e) to “set forth specific facts showing there is a genuine issue for trial.” 

See Dkt. #40 at 3.

(2) “Defendants’ Motion for Partial Summary Judgment” (Dkt. #29) and “Motion for

Summary Judgment” (Dkt. #33) are GRANTED, and this case is DISMISSED with prejudice.

(3) The Clerk of Court is directed to enter judgment accordingly and to send copies of

this Order to the parties.

//

//

Case 2:06-cv-00615-RSL Document 49 Filed 12/11/07 Page 2 of 3
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

ORDER OF DISMISSAL -3-

DATED this 11th day of December, 2007.

A

Robert S. Lasnik

United States District Judge 

Case 2:06-cv-00615-RSL Document 49 Filed 12/11/07 Page 3 of 3