Case: Washington v. The GEO Group Inc.

3:17-cv-05806 | U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington

Filed Date: Sept. 20, 2017

Case Ongoing

Clearinghouse coding complete

Case Summary

This case addressed whether a Washington State minimum wage law applied to immigration detainees. The state of Washington filed suit in the Pierce County Superior Court on September 20, 2017. The defendant was the GEO Group, Inc., a for-profit corporation that operated the Northwest Detention Center (NWDC). Washington had two causes of action. First, they claimed defendant’s policy of paying immigrant detainees only $1 per day violated the Washington Minimum Wage Act (MWA), which set the minimu…

This case addressed whether a Washington State minimum wage law applied to immigration detainees.

The state of Washington filed suit in the Pierce County Superior Court on September 20, 2017. The defendant was the GEO Group, Inc., a for-profit corporation that operated the Northwest Detention Center (NWDC). Washington had two causes of action. First, they claimed defendant’s policy of paying immigrant detainees only $1 per day violated the Washington Minimum Wage Act (MWA), which set the minimum wage at $11 per hour. RCW 49.46.020. Second, they alleged that defendant was unjustly enriched by this alleged violation. Washington sought injunctive and declaratory relief. This included declaring that the NWDC detainees were "employees" under the MWA, enjoining defendants from paying below minimum wage, and declaring that defendant was unjustly enriched.

Defendant filed a notice of removal on October 9, 2017. This case was moved to the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington (Tacoma). They argued the complaint involved issues of federal law as it references "adult civil detainees," a population defined exclusively under federal law. Further, the "allowance" for paid work is determined by federal statute and agencies as delegated by Congress. District Judge Robert J. Bryan was assigned.

Defendant moved to dismiss for failure to state a claim on October 16, 2017. They alleged that federal law, which allowed for immigrant detainees to be paid $1 per day, superseded the MWA, a state law. Additionally, immigrant detainees allegedly did not count as employees under the MWA. The court denied the motion on December 6, 2017. It held that federal law did not a conflict with the MWA. Under the MWA, only state detainees were not considered employees; the MWA said nothing about federal detainees. Federal law thus did not preempt the MWA. 283 F. Supp. 3d 967.

Defendant filed a counterclaim and affirmative defenses on December 20, 2017. Notably, defendant claimed a preemption defense in which federal laws override conflicting state laws. Defendant’s counterclaims alleged Washington would be unjustly enriched if detainees were paid minimum wage as detainees’ costs of living were paid for by the detention center. Defendants sought to offset any potential award to Washington by the value of services it provided to detainees. Defendant also sought declaratory and injunctive relief. This sought to enjoin Washington from claiming the MWA applied to NWDC detainees. and a declaration that defendant did not have an employment relationship with detainees.

Washington filed a motion to dismiss or strike most of defendant’s counterclaim and affirmative defenses on January 10, 2018. The court granted Washington's motion to dismiss in part on February 28, 2018. The court dismissed the defendant’s unjust enrichment claim and struck several of its affirmative defenses. The court did not dismiss the defendant’s claims for declaratory and injunctive relief. 2018 WL 1083826.

Defendant filed a motion to dismiss the case for failure to join government parties on March 20, 2018. Defendant had a contract with the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and U.S. Immigration and the U.S. Customs Enforcement (ICE), a subagency within DHS. This contract controlled how defendant managed the detention center. Defendant alleged that paying minimum wage would violate the contract as the standard for ICE’s Voluntary Work Program was $1 per day. It argued that DHS and ICE thus allegedly had a stake in the case’s outcome and needed to be joined. The court denied this motion on April 26, 2018. It reasoned that defendant's contract did not directly conflict with the MWA. DHS and ICE were also not interested in getting involved in the case. Defendant was contractually obligated to inform both agencies of this litigation and they did nothing. 2018 WL 1963792.

Defendant filed a motion for summary judgment on Washington's first cause of action (defendant's alleged violation of MWA) on November 8, 2018. They argued that the application of the MWA to the federal detention facility was forbidden by the Supremacy Clause's intergovernmental immunity doctrine (prevents federal and state governments from violating each other’s sovereignty). The court denied summary judgment on December 10, 2018. They reasoned intergovernmental immunity did not shield defendant from the MWA. 2018 WL 6448778.

Washington moved for partial summary judgment on April 11, 2019. The court granted the motion on May 13, 2019, dismissing defendant's affirmative defenses of laches (unreasonable delay in seeking relief), unclean hands (plaintiff acted in bad faith), and failure to join necessary parties. 2019 WL 2084463.

On May 28, 2019, Judge Bryan ordered this case to be consolidated with Chen v. GEO, a case involving similar issues in Washington detention centers.

Defendant filed a motion for summary judgment on July 2, 2019. They argued for derivative sovereign immunity (shields government contractors from liability) as it was allegedly the federal government that directed defendant to only pay detainees $1/day. That same day, Washington filed a motion for partial summary judgment on the MWA claim and defendant's preemption defense. On August 6, 2019, the court denied defendant's motion and granted Washington's motion only as to the preemption defense. 2019 WL 3565105.

Over the following months, parties conducted discovery. On June 1, 2021, a jury trial held via Zoom began.

Defendant moved for judgment as a matter of law on June 10, 2021, raising three primary arguments. First, detainees were not legally defined as employees. Defendant cited two exceptions under the MWA which excluded both people who resided at their workplace and people held in rehabilitative or correctional facilities. Second, defendant argued that it qualified for intergovernmental immunity and derivative sovereign immunity. Finally, the MWA, as a state law, was pre-empted by federal law. This motion was denied during the ongoing trial on June 11, 2021.

Defendant renewed its motion for judgment as a matter of law on June 14, 2021. On the same day, Washington also moved for judgment as a matter of law. Washington made the following two arguments. First, the detainees did not fall under the residential or correctional exceptions of the MWA cited by defendants. Second, defendant had failed to qualify for intergovernmental or derivative sovereign unity. On the same day, both the above motions were denied during the ongoing trial.

Defendant moved for a mistrial on June 17, 2021. They cited Ninth Circuit precedent holding that "a jury verdict must be unanimous" and that unanimity cannot be reached until all jurors reject all affirmative defenses and satisfy all elements for liability. In the present case, the court polled the jurors, and it was "clear that at least two jurors remained steadfast that they could not agree" on whether detainees were employees. Additionally, the jury's written communication to the court stated: "we are certain we cannot agree" on whether the MWA discriminated against defendant. That same day, the court ordered a mistrial when the jury declared they could not agree on a verdict. The following month, the court scheduled a pre-trial conference for October 1, 2021.

Washington once renewed its motion for judgment as a matter of law, and moved for the same relief, in July of 2021 following the mistrial. The court first denied GEO's motion except for those claims alleging that applying MWA to it amounted to discrimination. 2021 WL 4848139. Washington's motion for judgment as a matter of law sought relief on these grounds, too, and the court reserved judgment. Shortly thereafter, the court granted Washington's motion for judgment as a matter of law on the discrimination issues that were part of GEO's intergovernmental immunity defense. 2021 WL 3675011. Specifically, the court disagreed with GEO that failure to interpret the MWA as exempting GEO's facility or the workers at its facility amounted to discrimination because GEO failed to show that it was being treated differently than a similarly situated entity. The MWA, the court found, applied to private entities like GEO.

On August 30, 2021, Washington moved for an order certifying interlocutory appeal. It sought the Ninth Circuit's review of two questions. First, whether the district court was required to consider the FLSA when interpreting the definition of “employee” under the WMWA. And second, whether a determination that federal detainees were “employees” under the WMWA violated intergovernmental immunity. The district court denied this motion, concluding that GEO had not shown that these issues involved questions of law presenting substantial grounds for a difference of opinion. 2021 WL 4263743. The court also said that granting the certificate would not accelerate termination of the matter, but only delay trial.

The second jury trial began on October 14, 2021, and completed on November 2. Two days later, the court entered judgment in favor of the State of Washington in the amount of $5,950,340. The court also enjoined the defendant from continuing operation of the Voluntary Work Program because it did not pay detainee workers minimum wage. The court ruled on plaintiffs’ motion for attorney’s fees and costs on Dec 14, 2021. It granted plaintiffs’ $4,462,402.05 in attorneys’ fees and $191,398.07 in costs.

GEO appealed the judgment to the Ninth Circuit. As of March 25, 2022, appellate proceedings are stayed pending the Ninth Circuit's decision in Chen.

Summary Authors

Rebecca Strauss (5/24/2018)

Caitlin Kierum (3/29/2020)

Eric Gripp (7/31/2021)

Jordan Katz (11/14/2021)

Related Cases

Chen v. GEO, Western District of Washington (2017)

People

For PACER's information on parties and their attorneys, see: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/6167009/parties/state-of-washington-v-the-geo-group-inc/


Judge(s)

Bryan, Robert Jensen (Washington)

Attorneys(s) for Plaintiff

Baker, La Rond (Washington)

Brenneke, Andrea (Washington)

Chien, Marsha (Washington)

Ferguson, Robert W. (Washington)

Marquez, Patricio (Washington)

Mentzer, Eric (Washington)

Polozola, Lane (Washington)

Attorneys(s) for Defendant

Angel, Allison N (Colorado)

Arango, Jacqueline M (Florida)

Judge(s)

Bryan, Robert Jensen (Washington)

Attorneys(s) for Plaintiff

Baker, La Rond (Washington)

Brenneke, Andrea (Washington)

Chien, Marsha (Washington)

Ferguson, Robert W. (Washington)

Marquez, Patricio (Washington)

Mentzer, Eric (Washington)

Polozola, Lane (Washington)

Attorneys(s) for Defendant

Angel, Allison N (Colorado)

Arango, Jacqueline M (Florida)

Armstrong, Shannon L (Oregon)

Asai, Kristin Mariko (Oregon)

Barnacle, Colin L (Colorado)

Calabrese, Wayne Howard (Florida)

Calhoun, Ashley E (Colorado)

Castillo, Rubén (Illinois)

Cooper, Charles Justin (District of Columbia)

D'Ambra, Andrea (New York)

Deacon, Charles A (Texas)

Donohue, John M (Oregon)

Eby, Christopher J (Colorado)

Ellison, Dawn A (District of Columbia)

Emery, Mark Thomas (District of Columbia)

Kane, Tiernan (District of Columbia)

Kim, William J (Washington)

Mell, Joan K. (Washington)

Negron, Joseph Jr (Florida)

Pusateri, Michael (District of Columbia)

Roundtree, Al (Washington)

Scheffey, Adrienne (Colorado)

Schipma, Scott A (District of Columbia)

Short, Carolyn P. (Pennsylvania)

Silverman, Lawrence D (Florida)

Smith, Douglas Edward (Washington)

Stouck, Jerry (District of Columbia)

Other Attorney(s)

Antkowiak, Thomas (Washington)

Benson, Ann E. (Washington)

Davis, Antoinette Marie (Washington)

Ford, Elizabeth G. (Washington)

Kratz, Amy (Washington)

Lee, Melissa R (Washington)

Lynch, Christopher M (District of Columbia)

Vasquez, J. Dino (Washington)

Documents in the Clearinghouse

Document

Docket [PACER]

State of Washington v. The GEO Group Inc

Nov. 19, 2021 Docket
12

Complaint

State of Washington v. The GEO Group Inc.

Oct. 17, 2017 Complaint
29

Order on GEO's Motion to Dismiss Complaint

State of Washington v. The GEO Group Inc.

283 F.Supp.3d 967

Dec. 6, 2017 Order/Opinion
32

Order Denying Without Prejudice Plaintiff State of Washington's Motion to Remand

State of Washington v. The GEO Group Inc.

2017 WL 6351831

Dec. 13, 2017 Order/Opinion
44

Order on State's Motion to Dismiss or Strike Defendant's Counterclaims and Affirmative Defenses

State of Washington v. The GEO Group Inc.

2018 WL 1083826

Feb. 28, 2018 Order/Opinion
58

Order on Defendant the GEO Group Inc.'s Motion for Order of Dismissal Based on Plaintiff's Failure to Join Required Government Parties, or, Alternatively, to Add Required Government Parties

State of Washington v. The GEO Group Inc.

2018 WL 1963792

April 26, 2018 Order/Opinion
162

Order Denying Defendant the GEO Group, Inc.'s Motion for Summary Judgment on Plaintiff's First Cause of Action

Washington v. GEO

2018 WL 6448778

Dec. 10, 2018 Order/Opinion
202

Order on Washington's Motion for Partial Summary Judgment on the GEO Group, INC's Affirmative Defenses

Washington v. GEO

2019 WL 2084463

May 13, 2019 Order/Opinion
211

Order on Motion for Reconsideration

Washington v. GEO

2019 WL 2224932

May 23, 2019 Order/Opinion
288

Order on Cross Motions for Summary Judgment

Washington v. GEO

2019 WL 3565105

Aug. 6, 2019 Order/Opinion

Docket

See docket on RECAP: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/6167009/state-of-washington-v-the-geo-group-inc/

Last updated May 12, 2022, 8 p.m.

ECF Number Description Date Link
1

NOTICE OF REMOVAL from Pierce County Superior Court, case number 17-2-11422-2; (Receipt # 0981-5045824), filed by The GEO Group Inc. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit)(Mell, Joan) Modified on 10/11/2017 (GMR). (Entered: 10/09/2017)

1 Exhibit

View on RECAP

Oct. 9, 2017 RECAP
1

NOTICE OF REMOVAL from Pierce County Superior Court, case number 17-2-11422-2; (Receipt # 0981-5045824), filed by The GEO Group Inc. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit)(Mell, Joan) Modified on 10/11/2017 (GMR). (Entered: 10/09/2017)

1 Exhibit

View on RECAP

Oct. 9, 2017 RECAP
1

NOTICE OF REMOVAL from Pierce County Superior Court, case number 17-2-11422-2; (Receipt # 0981-5045824), filed by The GEO Group Inc. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit)(Mell, Joan) Modified on 10/11/2017 (GMR). (Entered: 10/09/2017)

1 Exhibit

View on RECAP

Oct. 9, 2017 RECAP
2

CIVIL COVER SHEET re 1 Notice of Removal ; filed by Defendant The GEO Group Inc. (Mell, Joan) Modified on 10/11/2017 (GMR). (Entered: 10/09/2017)

Oct. 9, 2017 RECAP
2

CIVIL COVER SHEET re 1 Notice of Removal ; filed by Defendant The GEO Group Inc. (Mell, Joan) Modified on 10/11/2017 (GMR). (Entered: 10/09/2017)

Oct. 9, 2017 RECAP
2

CIVIL COVER SHEET re 1 Notice of Removal ; filed by Defendant The GEO Group Inc. (Mell, Joan) Modified on 10/11/2017 (GMR). (Entered: 10/09/2017)

Oct. 9, 2017 RECAP
3

DECLARATION of Joan K Mell re 1 Notice of Removal by Defendant The GEO Group Inc (Mell, Joan) Modified on 10/11/2017 (GMR). (Entered: 10/09/2017)

Oct. 9, 2017 RECAP
3

DECLARATION of Joan K Mell re 1 Notice of Removal by Defendant The GEO Group Inc (Mell, Joan) Modified on 10/11/2017 (GMR). (Entered: 10/09/2017)

Oct. 9, 2017 RECAP
3

DECLARATION of Joan K Mell re 1 Notice of Removal by Defendant The GEO Group Inc (Mell, Joan) Modified on 10/11/2017 (GMR). (Entered: 10/09/2017)

Oct. 9, 2017 RECAP
4

DECLARATION Joan K Mell with Superior Court Filings re 1 Notice of Removal by Defendant The GEO Group Inc (Mell, Joan) Modified on 10/11/2017 (GMR). (Entered: 10/09/2017)

Oct. 9, 2017 RECAP
4

DECLARATION Joan K Mell with Superior Court Filings re 1 Notice of Removal by Defendant The GEO Group Inc (Mell, Joan) Modified on 10/11/2017 (GMR). (Entered: 10/09/2017)

Oct. 9, 2017 RECAP
4

DECLARATION Joan K Mell with Superior Court Filings re 1 Notice of Removal by Defendant The GEO Group Inc (Mell, Joan) Modified on 10/11/2017 (GMR). (Entered: 10/09/2017)

Oct. 9, 2017 RECAP
5

APPLICATION OF ATTORNEY Charles A. Deacon FOR LEAVE TO APPEAR PRO HAC VICE for Defendant The GEO Group Inc. (Fee Paid) Receipt No. 0981-5049197 (Mell, Joan) Modified on 10/11/2017 (GMR). (Entered: 10/11/2017)

Oct. 11, 2017 PACER
5

APPLICATION OF ATTORNEY Charles A. Deacon FOR LEAVE TO APPEAR PRO HAC VICE for Defendant The GEO Group Inc. (Fee Paid) Receipt No. 0981-5049197 (Mell, Joan) Modified on 10/11/2017 (GMR). (Entered: 10/11/2017)

Oct. 11, 2017 PACER
5

APPLICATION OF ATTORNEY Charles A. Deacon FOR LEAVE TO APPEAR PRO HAC VICE for Defendant The GEO Group Inc. (Fee Paid) Receipt No. 0981-5049197 (Mell, Joan) Modified on 10/11/2017 (GMR). (Entered: 10/11/2017)

Oct. 11, 2017 PACER

Add and Terminate Judges

Oct. 11, 2017 PACER

Add and Terminate Judges

Oct. 11, 2017 PACER

Add and Terminate Judges

Oct. 11, 2017 PACER
6

APPLICATION OF ATTORNEY Mark Emery FOR LEAVE TO APPEAR PRO HAC VICE for Defendant The GEO Group Inc. (Fee Paid) Receipt No. 0981-5049201 (Mell, Joan) Modified on 10/11/2017 (GMR). (Entered: 10/11/2017)

Oct. 11, 2017 PACER
6

APPLICATION OF ATTORNEY Mark Emery FOR LEAVE TO APPEAR PRO HAC VICE for Defendant The GEO Group Inc. (Fee Paid) Receipt No. 0981-5049201 (Mell, Joan) Modified on 10/11/2017 (GMR). (Entered: 10/11/2017)

Oct. 11, 2017 PACER
6

APPLICATION OF ATTORNEY Mark Emery FOR LEAVE TO APPEAR PRO HAC VICE for Defendant The GEO Group Inc. (Fee Paid) Receipt No. 0981-5049201 (Mell, Joan) Modified on 10/11/2017 (GMR). (Entered: 10/11/2017)

Oct. 11, 2017 PACER
7

ORDER on the 5 Application for Leave to Appear Pro Hac Vice. The Court ADMITS Attorney Charles A Deacon for The GEO Group Inc, by Clerk William M McCool. No document associated with this docket entry, text only.NOTE TO COUNSEL: Local counsel agrees to sign all filings and to be prepared to handle the matter, including the trial thereof, in the event the applicant is unable to be present on any date scheduled by the court, pursuant to LCR 83.1(d).(GMR) (Entered: 10/11/2017)

Oct. 11, 2017 PACER
7

ORDER on the 5 Application for Leave to Appear Pro Hac Vice. The Court ADMITS Attorney Charles A Deacon for The GEO Group Inc, by Clerk William M McCool. No document associated with this docket entry, text only.NOTE TO COUNSEL: Local counsel agrees to sign all filings and to be prepared to handle the matter, including the trial thereof, in the event the applicant is unable to be present on any date scheduled by the court, pursuant to LCR 83.1(d).(GMR) (Entered: 10/11/2017)

Oct. 11, 2017 PACER
7

ORDER on the 5 Application for Leave to Appear Pro Hac Vice. The Court ADMITS Attorney Charles A Deacon for The GEO Group Inc, by Clerk William M McCool. No document associated with this docket entry, text only.NOTE TO COUNSEL: Local counsel agrees to sign all filings and to be prepared to handle the matter, including the trial thereof, in the event the applicant is unable to be present on any date scheduled by the court, pursuant to LCR 83.1(d).(GMR) (Entered: 10/11/2017)

Oct. 11, 2017 PACER
8

ORDER on the 6 Application for Leave to Appear Pro Hac Vice. The Court ADMITS Attorney Mark Emery for The GEO Group Inc, by Clerk William M McCool. No document associated with this docket entry, text only.NOTE TO COUNSEL: Local counsel agrees to sign all filings and to be prepared to handle the matter, including the trial thereof, in the event the applicant is unable to be present on any date scheduled by the court, pursuant to LCR 83.1(d).(GMR) (Entered: 10/11/2017)

Oct. 11, 2017 PACER
8

ORDER on the 6 Application for Leave to Appear Pro Hac Vice. The Court ADMITS Attorney Mark Emery for The GEO Group Inc, by Clerk William M McCool. No document associated with this docket entry, text only.NOTE TO COUNSEL: Local counsel agrees to sign all filings and to be prepared to handle the matter, including the trial thereof, in the event the applicant is unable to be present on any date scheduled by the court, pursuant to LCR 83.1(d).(GMR) (Entered: 10/11/2017)

Oct. 11, 2017 PACER
8

ORDER on the 6 Application for Leave to Appear Pro Hac Vice. The Court ADMITS Attorney Mark Emery for The GEO Group Inc, by Clerk William M McCool. No document associated with this docket entry, text only.NOTE TO COUNSEL: Local counsel agrees to sign all filings and to be prepared to handle the matter, including the trial thereof, in the event the applicant is unable to be present on any date scheduled by the court, pursuant to LCR 83.1(d).(GMR) (Entered: 10/11/2017)

Oct. 11, 2017 PACER

Judge Theresa L Fricke added. (GMR)

Oct. 11, 2017 PACER

Judge Theresa L Fricke added. (GMR)

Oct. 11, 2017 PACER

Judge Theresa L Fricke added. (GMR)

Oct. 11, 2017 PACER
9

DEMAND for JURY TRIAL by Defendant The GEO Group Inc (Mell, Joan) (Entered: 10/12/2017)

Oct. 12, 2017 RECAP
9

DEMAND for JURY TRIAL by Defendant The GEO Group Inc (Mell, Joan) (Entered: 10/12/2017)

Oct. 12, 2017 RECAP
9

DEMAND for JURY TRIAL by Defendant The GEO Group Inc (Mell, Joan) (Entered: 10/12/2017)

Oct. 12, 2017 RECAP
10

MOTION TO DISMISS FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM, filed by Defendant The GEO Group Inc. Oral Argument Requested. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order) Noting Date 11/17/2017, (Mell, Joan) (Entered: 10/16/2017)

1 Proposed Order

View on PACER

Oct. 16, 2017 RECAP
10

MOTION TO DISMISS FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM, filed by Defendant The GEO Group Inc. Oral Argument Requested. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order) Noting Date 11/17/2017, (Mell, Joan) (Entered: 10/16/2017)

1 Proposed Order

View on PACER

Oct. 16, 2017 RECAP
10

MOTION TO DISMISS FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM, filed by Defendant The GEO Group Inc. Oral Argument Requested. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order) Noting Date 11/17/2017, (Mell, Joan) (Entered: 10/16/2017)

1 Proposed Order

View on PACER

Oct. 16, 2017 RECAP
11

DISREGARD- FILED IN ERROR DECLARATION of JOAN K. MELL filed by Defendant The GEO Group Inc re 10 MOTION TO DISMISS FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM (Mell, Joan) Modified on 10/17/2017- attorney's office called re filing error (GMR). (Entered: 10/16/2017)

Oct. 16, 2017 RECAP
11

DISREGARD- FILED IN ERROR DECLARATION of JOAN K. MELL filed by Defendant The GEO Group Inc re 10 MOTION TO DISMISS FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM (Mell, Joan) Modified on 10/17/2017- attorney's office called re filing error (GMR). (Entered: 10/16/2017)

Oct. 16, 2017 RECAP
11

DISREGARD- FILED IN ERROR DECLARATION of JOAN K. MELL filed by Defendant The GEO Group Inc re 10 MOTION TO DISMISS FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM (Mell, Joan) Modified on 10/17/2017- attorney's office called re filing error (GMR). (Entered: 10/16/2017)

Oct. 16, 2017 RECAP

NOTICE of Docket Text Modification: per attorney's office the 11 Declaration of Joan Mell was filed in error and should be disregarded. (GMR)

Oct. 17, 2017 PACER

NOTICE of Docket Text Modification: per attorney's office the 11 Declaration of Joan Mell was filed in error and should be disregarded. (GMR)

Oct. 17, 2017 PACER

NOTICE of Docket Text Modification: per attorney's office the 11 Declaration of Joan Mell was filed in error and should be disregarded. (GMR)

Oct. 17, 2017 PACER

Notice of Docket Text Modification

Oct. 17, 2017 PACER

Notice of Docket Text Modification

Oct. 17, 2017 PACER

Notice of Docket Text Modification

Oct. 17, 2017 PACER
12

PRAECIPE to attach document (Exhibit 1; Complaint) Complaint Filed in Pierce County Superior Court re 10 MOTION TO DISMISS FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM by Defendant The GEO Group Inc (Mell, Joan) (Entered: 10/17/2017)

Oct. 17, 2017 Clearinghouse
12

PRAECIPE to attach document (Exhibit 1; Complaint) Complaint Filed in Pierce County Superior Court re 10 MOTION TO DISMISS FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM by Defendant The GEO Group Inc (Mell, Joan) (Entered: 10/17/2017)

Oct. 17, 2017 Clearinghouse
12

PRAECIPE to attach document (Exhibit 1; Complaint) Complaint Filed in Pierce County Superior Court re 10 MOTION TO DISMISS FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM by Defendant The GEO Group Inc (Mell, Joan) (Entered: 10/17/2017)

Oct. 17, 2017 Clearinghouse

Motions Referred

Oct. 17, 2017 PACER

Motions Referred

Oct. 17, 2017 PACER

Motions Referred

Oct. 17, 2017 PACER
13

MINUTE ORDER REASSIGNING CASE. Case reassigned to Judge Robert J. Bryan for all further proceedings as matter is related to 3:17-cv-05769-RJB. Magistrate Judge Theresa L Fricke no longer assigned to case. By Traci Whiteley, Deputy Clerk, at the direction of Magistrate Judge Theresa L Fricke. (TW) (Entered: 10/17/2017)

Oct. 17, 2017 PACER
13

MINUTE ORDER REASSIGNING CASE. Case reassigned to Judge Robert J. Bryan for all further proceedings as matter is related to 3:17-cv-05769-RJB. Magistrate Judge Theresa L Fricke no longer assigned to case. By Traci Whiteley, Deputy Clerk, at the direction of Magistrate Judge Theresa L Fricke. (TW) (Entered: 10/17/2017)

Oct. 17, 2017 PACER
13

MINUTE ORDER REASSIGNING CASE. Case reassigned to Judge Robert J. Bryan for all further proceedings as matter is related to 3:17-cv-05769-RJB. Magistrate Judge Theresa L Fricke no longer assigned to case. By Traci Whiteley, Deputy Clerk, at the direction of Magistrate Judge Theresa L Fricke. (TW) (Entered: 10/17/2017)

Oct. 17, 2017 PACER

MOTION REFERRED/ASSIGNED to Judge Robert J. Bryan: re 10 MOTION TO DISMISS FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM (TW)

Oct. 17, 2017 PACER

MOTION REFERRED/ASSIGNED to Judge Robert J. Bryan: re 10 MOTION TO DISMISS FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM (TW)

Oct. 17, 2017 PACER

MOTION REFERRED/ASSIGNED to Judge Robert J. Bryan: re 10 MOTION TO DISMISS FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM (TW)

Oct. 17, 2017 PACER
14

ORDER Setting Hearing on Motion 10 MOTION TO DISMISS FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM : Motion Hearing set for 11/20/2017 at 11:00 AM in Courtroom A before Judge Robert J. Bryan.Signed by Judge Robert J. Bryan. (JL) (Entered: 11/07/2017)

Nov. 7, 2017 RECAP
14

ORDER Setting Hearing on Motion 10 MOTION TO DISMISS FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM : Motion Hearing set for 11/20/2017 at 11:00 AM in Courtroom A before Judge Robert J. Bryan.Signed by Judge Robert J. Bryan. (JL) (Entered: 11/07/2017)

Nov. 7, 2017 RECAP
14

ORDER Setting Hearing on Motion 10 MOTION TO DISMISS FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM : Motion Hearing set for 11/20/2017 at 11:00 AM in Courtroom A before Judge Robert J. Bryan.Signed by Judge Robert J. Bryan. (JL) (Entered: 11/07/2017)

Nov. 7, 2017 RECAP
15

MOTION to Remand, filed by Plaintiff State of Washington. Oral Argument Requested. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order) Noting Date 12/1/2017, (Baker, La Rond) (Entered: 11/08/2017)

1 Proposed Order

View on PACER

Nov. 8, 2017 RECAP
15

MOTION to Remand, filed by Plaintiff State of Washington. Oral Argument Requested. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order) Noting Date 12/1/2017, (Baker, La Rond) (Entered: 11/08/2017)

1 Proposed Order

View on PACER

Nov. 8, 2017 RECAP
15

MOTION to Remand, filed by Plaintiff State of Washington. Oral Argument Requested. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order) Noting Date 12/1/2017, (Baker, La Rond) (Entered: 11/08/2017)

1 Proposed Order

View on PACER

Nov. 8, 2017 RECAP
16

DECLARATION of La Rond Baker filed by Plaintiff State of Washington re 15 MOTION to Remand (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A, # 2 Exhibit B)(Baker, La Rond) (Entered: 11/08/2017)

1 Exhibit A

View on RECAP

2 Exhibit B

View on RECAP

Nov. 8, 2017 RECAP
16

DECLARATION of La Rond Baker filed by Plaintiff State of Washington re 15 MOTION to Remand (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A, # 2 Exhibit B)(Baker, La Rond) (Entered: 11/08/2017)

1 Exhibit A

View on RECAP

2 Exhibit B

View on RECAP

Nov. 8, 2017 RECAP
16

DECLARATION of La Rond Baker filed by Plaintiff State of Washington re 15 MOTION to Remand (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A, # 2 Exhibit B)(Baker, La Rond) (Entered: 11/08/2017)

1 Exhibit A

View on RECAP

2 Exhibit B

View on RECAP

Nov. 8, 2017 RECAP
17

RESPONSE, by Plaintiff State of Washington, to 10 MOTION TO DISMISS FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM . Oral Argument Requested. (Chien, Marsha) (Entered: 11/13/2017)

Nov. 13, 2017 RECAP
17

RESPONSE, by Plaintiff State of Washington, to 10 MOTION TO DISMISS FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM . Oral Argument Requested. (Chien, Marsha) (Entered: 11/13/2017)

Nov. 13, 2017 RECAP
17

RESPONSE, by Plaintiff State of Washington, to 10 MOTION TO DISMISS FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM . Oral Argument Requested. (Chien, Marsha) (Entered: 11/13/2017)

Nov. 13, 2017 RECAP
18

REPLY, filed by Defendant The GEO Group Inc, TO RESPONSE to 10 MOTION TO DISMISS FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM (Mell, Joan) (Entered: 11/17/2017)

Nov. 17, 2017 RECAP
18

REPLY, filed by Defendant The GEO Group Inc, TO RESPONSE to 10 MOTION TO DISMISS FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM (Mell, Joan) (Entered: 11/17/2017)

Nov. 17, 2017 RECAP
18

REPLY, filed by Defendant The GEO Group Inc, TO RESPONSE to 10 MOTION TO DISMISS FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM (Mell, Joan) (Entered: 11/17/2017)

Nov. 17, 2017 RECAP
19

DECLARATION OF JOAN K. MELL ATTACHING GEO-ICE CONTRACT WITH LIMITED TRADE SECRET REDACTIONS by Defendant The GEO Group Inc (Mell, Joan) (Entered: 11/17/2017)

Nov. 17, 2017 PACER
19

DECLARATION OF JOAN K. MELL ATTACHING GEO-ICE CONTRACT WITH LIMITED TRADE SECRET REDACTIONS by Defendant The GEO Group Inc (Mell, Joan) (Entered: 11/17/2017)

Nov. 17, 2017 PACER
19

DECLARATION OF JOAN K. MELL ATTACHING GEO-ICE CONTRACT WITH LIMITED TRADE SECRET REDACTIONS by Defendant The GEO Group Inc (Mell, Joan) (Entered: 11/17/2017)

Nov. 17, 2017 PACER
20

MOTION to Seal LIMITED REDACTED PAGES OF THE GEO-ICE CONTRACT, filed by Defendant The GEO Group Inc. Oral Argument Requested. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order) Noting Date 11/17/2017, (Mell, Joan) (Entered: 11/17/2017)

1 Proposed Order

View on PACER

Nov. 17, 2017 PACER
20

MOTION to Seal LIMITED REDACTED PAGES OF THE GEO-ICE CONTRACT, filed by Defendant The GEO Group Inc. Oral Argument Requested. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order) Noting Date 11/17/2017, (Mell, Joan) (Entered: 11/17/2017)

1 Proposed Order

View on PACER

Nov. 17, 2017 PACER
20

MOTION to Seal LIMITED REDACTED PAGES OF THE GEO-ICE CONTRACT, filed by Defendant The GEO Group Inc. Oral Argument Requested. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order) Noting Date 11/17/2017, (Mell, Joan) (Entered: 11/17/2017)

1 Proposed Order

View on PACER

Nov. 17, 2017 PACER
21

MINUTE ENTRY for proceedings held before Judge Robert J. Bryan- Dep Clerk: Tyler Campbell; Pla Counsel: Ptf Chen: Andrew Free, Adam Berger, Jamal Whitehead, Devin Theroit-Orr, Lindsay Halm; Ptf State of WA: Marsha Chien, La Rond Baker; Def Counsel: Joan Mell, Charles Deacon, Mark Emery; CR: Angela Nicolavo; Motion Hearing held on 11/20/2017 re 10 MOTION TO DISMISS FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM filed by The GEO Group Inc. Argument by parties. Order to be issued. (TC) (Entered: 11/20/2017)

Nov. 20, 2017 PACER
21

MINUTE ENTRY for proceedings held before Judge Robert J. Bryan- Dep Clerk: Tyler Campbell; Pla Counsel: Ptf Chen: Andrew Free, Adam Berger, Jamal Whitehead, Devin Theroit-Orr, Lindsay Halm; Ptf State of WA: Marsha Chien, La Rond Baker; Def Counsel: Joan Mell, Charles Deacon, Mark Emery; CR: Angela Nicolavo; Motion Hearing held on 11/20/2017 re 10 MOTION TO DISMISS FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM filed by The GEO Group Inc. Argument by parties. Order to be issued. (TC) (Entered: 11/20/2017)

Nov. 20, 2017 PACER
21

MINUTE ENTRY for proceedings held before Judge Robert J. Bryan- Dep Clerk: Tyler Campbell; Pla Counsel: Ptf Chen: Andrew Free, Adam Berger, Jamal Whitehead, Devin Theroit-Orr, Lindsay Halm; Ptf State of WA: Marsha Chien, La Rond Baker; Def Counsel: Joan Mell, Charles Deacon, Mark Emery; CR: Angela Nicolavo; Motion Hearing held on 11/20/2017 re 10 MOTION TO DISMISS FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM filed by The GEO Group Inc. Argument by parties. Order to be issued. (TC) (Entered: 11/20/2017)

Nov. 20, 2017 PACER
22

MINUTE ORDER. Pursuant to Western District of Washington Local Civil Rule 7(d)(2), the MOTION to Seal LIMITED REDACTED PAGES OF THE GEO-ICE CONTRACT (Dkt. 20 ) is hereby renoted to 12/1/2017. Authorized by Judge Robert J. Bryan. (JL) (Entered: 11/21/2017)

Nov. 21, 2017 PACER
22

MINUTE ORDER. Pursuant to Western District of Washington Local Civil Rule 7(d)(2), the MOTION to Seal LIMITED REDACTED PAGES OF THE GEO-ICE CONTRACT (Dkt. 20 ) is hereby renoted to 12/1/2017. Authorized by Judge Robert J. Bryan. (JL) (Entered: 11/21/2017)

Nov. 21, 2017 PACER
22

MINUTE ORDER. Pursuant to Western District of Washington Local Civil Rule 7(d)(2), the MOTION to Seal LIMITED REDACTED PAGES OF THE GEO-ICE CONTRACT (Dkt. 20 ) is hereby renoted to 12/1/2017. Authorized by Judge Robert J. Bryan. (JL) (Entered: 11/21/2017)

Nov. 21, 2017 PACER
23

RESPONSE, by Defendant The GEO Group Inc, to 15 MOTION to Remand . Oral Argument Requested. (Mell, Joan) (Entered: 11/27/2017)

Nov. 27, 2017 PACER
23

RESPONSE, by Defendant The GEO Group Inc, to 15 MOTION to Remand . Oral Argument Requested. (Mell, Joan) (Entered: 11/27/2017)

Nov. 27, 2017 PACER
23

RESPONSE, by Defendant The GEO Group Inc, to 15 MOTION to Remand . Oral Argument Requested. (Mell, Joan) (Entered: 11/27/2017)

Nov. 27, 2017 PACER
24

RESPONSE, by Plaintiff State of Washington, to 20 MOTION to Seal LIMITED REDACTED PAGES OF THE GEO-ICE CONTRACT. (Baker, La Rond) (Entered: 11/27/2017)

Nov. 27, 2017 RECAP
24

RESPONSE, by Plaintiff State of Washington, to 20 MOTION to Seal LIMITED REDACTED PAGES OF THE GEO-ICE CONTRACT. (Baker, La Rond) (Entered: 11/27/2017)

Nov. 27, 2017 RECAP
24

RESPONSE, by Plaintiff State of Washington, to 20 MOTION to Seal LIMITED REDACTED PAGES OF THE GEO-ICE CONTRACT. (Baker, La Rond) (Entered: 11/27/2017)

Nov. 27, 2017 RECAP
25

DECLARATION OF JOAN K. MELL ATTACHING GEO-ICE AMENDMENTS TO THE 2015 CONTRACT by Defendant The GEO Group Inc (Mell, Joan) (Entered: 11/30/2017)

Nov. 30, 2017 PACER
25

DECLARATION OF JOAN K. MELL ATTACHING GEO-ICE AMENDMENTS TO THE 2015 CONTRACT by Defendant The GEO Group Inc (Mell, Joan) (Entered: 11/30/2017)

Nov. 30, 2017 PACER
25

DECLARATION OF JOAN K. MELL ATTACHING GEO-ICE AMENDMENTS TO THE 2015 CONTRACT by Defendant The GEO Group Inc (Mell, Joan) (Entered: 11/30/2017)

Nov. 30, 2017 PACER
26

REPLY, filed by Defendant The GEO Group Inc, TO RESPONSE to 20 MOTION to Seal LIMITED REDACTED PAGES OF THE GEO-ICE CONTRACT (Mell, Joan) (Entered: 12/01/2017)

Dec. 1, 2017 PACER
26

REPLY, filed by Defendant The GEO Group Inc, TO RESPONSE to 20 MOTION to Seal LIMITED REDACTED PAGES OF THE GEO-ICE CONTRACT (Mell, Joan) (Entered: 12/01/2017)

Dec. 1, 2017 PACER
26

REPLY, filed by Defendant The GEO Group Inc, TO RESPONSE to 20 MOTION to Seal LIMITED REDACTED PAGES OF THE GEO-ICE CONTRACT (Mell, Joan) (Entered: 12/01/2017)

Dec. 1, 2017 PACER
27

DECLARATION of DAVID VENTURELLA IN SUPPORT OF GEO'S MOTION TO FILE LIMITED REDACTED PAGES IN CAMERA AND UNDER SEAL filed by Defendant The GEO Group Inc re 20 MOTION to Seal LIMITED REDACTED PAGES OF THE GEO-ICE CONTRACT (Mell, Joan) (Entered: 12/01/2017)

Dec. 1, 2017 PACER
27

DECLARATION of DAVID VENTURELLA IN SUPPORT OF GEO'S MOTION TO FILE LIMITED REDACTED PAGES IN CAMERA AND UNDER SEAL filed by Defendant The GEO Group Inc re 20 MOTION to Seal LIMITED REDACTED PAGES OF THE GEO-ICE CONTRACT (Mell, Joan) (Entered: 12/01/2017)

Dec. 1, 2017 PACER
27

DECLARATION of DAVID VENTURELLA IN SUPPORT OF GEO'S MOTION TO FILE LIMITED REDACTED PAGES IN CAMERA AND UNDER SEAL filed by Defendant The GEO Group Inc re 20 MOTION to Seal LIMITED REDACTED PAGES OF THE GEO-ICE CONTRACT (Mell, Joan) (Entered: 12/01/2017)

Dec. 1, 2017 PACER
28

REPLY, filed by Plaintiff State of Washington, TO RESPONSE to 15 MOTION to Remand (Baker, La Rond) (Entered: 12/01/2017)

Dec. 1, 2017 PACER

State / Territory: Washington

Case Type(s):

Criminal Justice (Other)

Special Collection(s):

Immigrant Detention Labor Issues

Key Dates

Filing Date: Sept. 20, 2017

Case Ongoing: Yes

Plaintiffs

Plaintiff Description:

The State of Washington

Plaintiff Type(s):

State Plaintiff

Public Interest Lawyer: Yes

Filed Pro Se: No

Class Action Sought: No

Class Action Outcome: Not sought

Defendants

The GEO Group, Inc. (Tacoma), Private Entity/Person

Defendant Type(s):

Corrections

Case Details

Causes of Action:

State law

Declaratory Judgment Act, 28 U.S.C. § 2201

Constitutional Clause(s):

Supremacy Clause

Availably Documents:

Trial Court Docket

Complaint (any)

Monetary Relief

Injunctive (or Injunctive-like) Relief

Any published opinion

Outcome

Prevailing Party: Plaintiff

Nature of Relief:

Injunction / Injunctive-like Settlement

Damages

Source of Relief:

Litigation

Amount Defendant Pays: 5950340

Issues

General:

Conditions of confinement

Forced labor

Work release or work assignments

Type of Facility:

Non-government for profit

Immigration/Border:

Detention - procedures

Employment