U.S. v. Psaradelis, C16-1549JLR. (2017)
Court: District Court, D. Washington
Number: infdco20170111h45
Visitors: 39
Filed: Jan. 11, 2017
Latest Update: Jan. 11, 2017
Summary: ORDER JAMES L. ROBART , District Judge . Before the court is Plaintiff United States of America's ("the Government") January 10, 2017, motion. (Mot. (Dkt. # 6).) The Government asks the court to (1) construe pro se Defendants James C. Psaradelis and Cynthia L. Psaradelis's December 6, 2016, letter (12/6/16 Letter (Dkt. # 5)) as an answer, and (2) issue an initial scheduling order in this action (Mot. at 2). The Psaradelises' December 6, 2016, letter addresses the tax-related allegations
Summary: ORDER JAMES L. ROBART , District Judge . Before the court is Plaintiff United States of America's ("the Government") January 10, 2017, motion. (Mot. (Dkt. # 6).) The Government asks the court to (1) construe pro se Defendants James C. Psaradelis and Cynthia L. Psaradelis's December 6, 2016, letter (12/6/16 Letter (Dkt. # 5)) as an answer, and (2) issue an initial scheduling order in this action (Mot. at 2). The Psaradelises' December 6, 2016, letter addresses the tax-related allegations i..
More
ORDER
JAMES L. ROBART, District Judge.
Before the court is Plaintiff United States of America's ("the Government") January 10, 2017, motion. (Mot. (Dkt. # 6).) The Government asks the court to (1) construe pro se Defendants James C. Psaradelis and Cynthia L. Psaradelis's December 6, 2016, letter (12/6/16 Letter (Dkt. # 5)) as an answer, and (2) issue an initial scheduling order in this action (Mot. at 2).
The Psaradelises' December 6, 2016, letter addresses the tax-related allegations in the Government's complaint (see Compl. (Dkt. 1)) and explains the Psaradelises' position on those allegations (see 12/6/16 Letter at 1-2). In addition, the Psaradelises' letter appears responsive to a November 29, 2016, letter from the Government, in which the Government apprised the Psaradelises of the Government's intent to seek a default judgment if the Psaradelises did not file an answer by December 22, 2016. (See Mot., Ex. A (Dkt. # 6-1) at 2.) In light of these facts and the court's obligation to liberally construe the Psaradelises' pro se filings,1 the court GRANTS the Government's motion (Dkt. # 6), CONSTRUES the Psaradelises' letter (Dkt. # 5) as their answer to the complaint, and DIRECTS the Clerk to issue an initial scheduling order.
FootNotes
1. Unless the Psaradelises retain counsel, they are responsible for pursuing this case pro se. Although the court may afford some leeway to pro se litigants, the Psaradelises are responsible for complying with case deadlines, the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, and the Western District of Washington's Local Civil Rules. Materials to assist pro se litigants, including a copy of the Local Civil Rules, are available on the United States District Court for the Western District of Washington's website.
Source: Leagle
