NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS JAN 30 2017
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
HECTOR L. RESSY, No. 15-35565
Plaintiff-Appellant, D.C. No. 3:14-cv-05693-RBL
v.
MEMORANDUM*
PIERCE COUNTY; et al.,
Defendants-Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Washington
Ronald B. Leighton, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted January 18, 2017**
Before: TROTT, TASHIMA, and CALLAHAN, Circuit Judges.
Hector L. Ressy appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing
as untimely his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging federal and state law claims
arising from his pretrial detention. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291.
We review de novo. Butler v. Nat’l Cmty. Renaissance of Cal., 755 F.3d 1191,
*
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
**
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
1194 (9th Cir. 2014) (application of the relation-back doctrine under Federal Rule
of Civil Procedure 15(c)); Papa v. United States, 281 F.3d 1004, 1009 (9th Cir.
2002) (dismissal based on the statute of limitations). We affirm.
The district court properly dismissed Ressy’s claim as barred by the statute
of limitations. See Bagley v. CMC Real Estate Corp., 923 F.2d 758, 750 (9th Cir.
1991) (limitations period for § 1983 claim is three years under Washington state
law); see also Woods View II, LLC v. Kitsap Cnty., 352 P.3d 807, 816 (Wash. Ct.
App. 2015) (the statute of limitations for a negligence action is three years). The
district court properly concluded that Ressy’s amended complaint did not relate
back to his original complaint under Rule 15 because Ressy failed to demonstrate
that defendants had timely notice of Ressy’s action or knew or should have known
that the action would have been brought against them but for Ressy’s mistake
concerning their identity. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(c)(1)(C); Wash. Civ. R. 15(c); see
also Butler, 766 F.3d at 1202-03 (discussing the requirements for relation-back
under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15(c)(1)(C)).
AFFIRMED.
2 15-35565