Hudson v. Office of the Superintendent of Public Instruction

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON 9 AT SEATTLE 11 MARIA ANN HUDSON, CASE NO. 2:25-cv-00404-TL 12 Plaintiff, ORDER ON MOTION FOR LEAVE v. TO FILE LATE STATE OF WASHINGTON et al., Defendant(s).

17 This matter is before the Court on Plaintiff’s Motion for Leave to File Late. Dkt. No. 13.

18 On August 20, 2025, the Court dismissed Plaintiff’s Second Amended Complaint for failure to state a claim. Dkt. No. 12. However, the Court granted Plaintiff leave to amend her complaint and file a new one by Friday, September 19, 2025. Id. On Monday, September 22, 2025, Plaintiff filed a Motion for Leave to File Late, with a Third Amended Complaint attached. Dkt. No. 13-1.

22 Because Plaintiff is pro se and only filed her Motion for Leave to File Late, along with her Third Amended Complaint, one day late the Court will grant Plaintiff some leeway this time.

24 However, “it is axiomatic that pro se litigants, whatever their ability level, are subject to the 1 procedural requirements as other litigants.” Munoz v. United States, 28 F.4th 973, 978 (9th || Cir. 2022) (internal citations omitted). Therefore, the Court cautions that any future filings that || are late may be summarily dismissed.

4 For the reasons explained herein, the Court ORDERS as follows: 5 1. Plaintiff's motion is hereby GRANTED.

6 2. The Court further DIRECTS the clerk to file Plaintiff's Third Amended Complaint 7 (Dkt. No. 13-1) on the docket.

9 Dated this 1st day of October, 2025. a Z€ 1] Tana Lin United States District Judge