Watson v. Roff
Trial Court Opinion
4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON 5 AT SEATTLE ERIC WATSON, et al., 7 Plaintiffs, Case No. C21-1622-RSM 8 v. MINUTE ORDER MIKE ROFF, et al., 10 Defendants.
12 The following Minute Order is made at the direction of the Court, the Hon. S. Kate Vaughan, United States Magistrate Judge: 14 Plaintiff Eric Watson failed to sign his motion to proceed in forma pauperis (IFP), Dkt. 7.
15 Fed. R. Civ. P. 11(a) (papers filed with court must contain signature); Giebelhaus v. Spindrift Yachts, 938 F.2d 962, 965-66 (9th Cir. 1991) (“a ‘signature’ is more than simply a typewritten name.”) Plaintiff must, within twenty (20) days of the date of this order, submit an IFP application with signatures on both the IFP and Written Consent for Payment of Costs portions of the form. Failure to timely comply may result in denial of the IFP motion. The Clerk is directed to send a copy of this order and of this Court’s standard form to Plaintiff.
21 Dated this 12th day of January, 2022.
22 RAVI SUBRAMANIAN Clerk of Court By: Stefanie Prather Deputy Clerk
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.