Morris v. Rambo et al Doc.

14
Case 3:06-cv-05279-FDB Document 14 Filed 08/16/2006 Page 1 of 2

8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON
9 AT TACOMA

10 LOUIS MORRIS, a single male,,

11 Plaintiff,
Case No. C06-5279 FDB
12 v.
ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO
13 JOSHUA RAMBO and JANE DOE RAMBO, DISMISS WITHOUT PREJUDICE
husband and wife and the marital community
14 comprised thereof,
15 Defendants.
16

17
This matter comes before the Court on the motion of Defendant United States of America1
18
to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. The Defendant asserts that this Court lacks
19
jurisdiction under the Federal Tort Claims Act due to Plaintiff’s failure to file the requisite
20
administrative tort claim within two years after accrual of his claim. 28 U.S.C. § 2401(b); Cato v.
21
United States, 70 F.3d 1103, 1107 (9th Cir. 1995).
22
In response, Plaintiff does not dispute that he has failed to file an administrative tort claim
23

24
1
Pursuant to the Federal Tort Claims Act, the United states has been substituted as the sole
25 Defendant respect to all of Plaintiff’s claims sounding in tort. 28 U.S.C. § 2679(b) and (d).
26 ORDER - 1

Dockets.Justia.com
 Case 3:06-cv-05279-FDB Document 14 Filed 08/16/2006 Page 2 of 2

1 and that his complaint is subject to dismissal. Plaintiff request that the dismissal be without

2 prejudice because his active military duty tolls the two year statute of limitations under the Service

3 Members Civil Relief Act, 50 U.S.C. § 521. The United States replies that it has no objection to

4 Plaintiff’s request for dismissal without prejudice.

5 ACCORDINGLY,

6 IT IS ORDERED:

7 The United States Motion to Dismiss For Lack of Subject Matter Jurisdiction [Dkt. # 7] is

8 GRANTED and Plaintiff’s complaint DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.

10 DATED this 16th day of August, 2006.

11

A
12

13

14 FRANKLIN D. BURGESS
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26 ORDER - 2