THE HONORABLE JOHN C. COUGHENOUR
1
2
3
4
5
6
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
7
WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON
8 AT SEATTLE
9 KOANG GACH, CASE NO. C24-1285-JCC
10
Plaintiff, ORDER
11 v.
12 GRANT LYONS, et al.,
13 Defendants.
14
15 This matter comes before the Court on Defendant Grant Lyons’s unopposed motion to
16 dismiss (Dkt. No. 17). Having reviewed the motion and the relevant record, the Court finds good
17 cause, and GRANTS the motion, as further described below.
18 Plaintiff filed a pro se § 1983 complaint on August 16, 2024, alleging that Defendant law
19 enforcement officers violated his rights by using excessive force against him. (See Dkt. Nos. 1, 9
20 at 4–6.) Plaintiff’s allegations are spare, but Plaintiff is specific as to one critical thing—the date
21 of the events at issue: May 11, 2018. (Dkt. No. 9 at 6.) Defendant moved to dismiss under Rule
22 12(b)(6) on December 19, 2024, arguing Plaintiff’s claims are barred by a three-year statute of
23 limitations. (See generally Dkt. No. 17.) They provided Plaintiff notice the same day. (Dkt. No.
24 18.) It informed Plaintiff that he was entitled to respond and that the Court may consider failure
25 to do so as an admission that the Defendant’s motion has merit. (Dkt. No. 18 at 1–2) (see also
26 LCR 7(b)(2)).
1 To note, in Washington, a plaintiff has three years to file a § 1983 action, from the time
2 the plaintiff knew or should have known the factual basis for the claim. See RCW 4.16.080(2);
3 Gausvik v. Perez, 392 F.3d 1006, 1009 (9th Cir. 2004); see also Bagley v. CMC Real Est. Corp.,
4 923 F.2d 758, 760 (9th Cir. 1991) (applying RCW 4.16.080(2) statute of limitations to a § 1983
5 action in Washington). Again, Plaintiff alleges the events here occurred and accrued May 11,
6 2018. As Defendant observes, (Dkt. No. 17 at 2), Plaintiff did not file his complaint until more
7 than six years later, well outside the statute of limitations.
8 Accordingly, Defendant’s motion (Dkt. No. 17) is GRANTED. All claims against
9 Defendant Lyons are dismissed with prejudice for failure to state a claim. The Clerk is directed
10 to send a copy of this order to Plaintiff.
11
12 DATED this 13th day of February 2025.
A
13
14
15
John C. Coughenour
16 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
Not legal advice. These patterns come from public court records, not ratings of judges as people. They may reflect the types of cases a judge handles, local procedures or other factors, and they do not account for the facts of any individual case. Past patterns do not predict future rulings. Records can be incomplete, months behind current activity, or matched to the wrong person; sealed and confidential cases are not included. Use this as one piece of information, never the sole basis for legal strategy or a recusal motion. Full disclaimer: https://judgefinder.io/legal/disclaimer Read the full disclaimer.