Johnsen v. Harlan

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE 10 RICHARD LEE JOHNSEN, CASE NO. C19-58 MJP 11 Plaintiff, ORDER OF DISMISSAL 12 v. 13 HARLAN and GOMEZ, 14 Defendant.

16 Late last year, Defendants provided the Court with notice of the death of Plaintiff. Dkt.

17 No. 49. This triggered an order pursuant to FRCP 25(a) that the “suggesting party” file a formal notice of death and serve “non-party successors of the deceased with the suggestion of death.”

19 This triggers a 90-day time period in which any non-party successor of the deceased plaintiff must appear and substitute in for the decedent. Dkt. No. 51. Failure to do so requires dismissal of the decedent’s lawsuit. FRCP 25(a)(1); see also Barlow v. Ground, 39 F.3d 231, 233 (9th Cir. 1994).

1 Defendants complied with the Court’s directive, filing a Notice of Death of Plaintiff and Existence of Lawsuit and mailing that notice to the successors of Plaintiff (his mother and daughter) whom they were able to identify. Dkt. No. 52. Over 90 days have elapsed since the notification to Plaintiff’s successors and no appearance has been made, therefore 5 IT IS ORDERED that, pursuant to FRCP 25(a), the above-entitled matter is DISMISSED.

8 The clerk is ordered to provide copies of this order to all counsel.

9 Dated May 18, 2020.

A Marsha J. Pechman United States Senior District Judge