Case 2:18-cv-00743-RAJ Document 21 Filed 06/25/18 Page 1 of 8

Hon. Richard A. Jones

1
2
3
4
5

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE

6
7
8

RENTBERRY, INC., a Delaware Corporation,
and Delaney Wysingle, an individual,

9
Plaintiffs,

No. 2:18-cv-00743-RAJ

10
vs.
11
12

CITY OF SEATTLE, a Washington Municipal
Corporation,

13

CITY OF SEATTLE’S ANSWER
TO COMPLAINT

Defendant.

14
ANSWER

15
16
17

The City of Seattle (City) answers the Complaint filed by Plaintiffs Rentberry, Inc. (Rentberry)
and Delaney Wysingle (Wysingle) as follows:
INTRODUCTION

18
19
20

1.

Paragraph 1 only asserts a legal conclusion, and therefore warrants no response. On

that basis, the City denies the same.
JURISDICTION AND VENUE

21
22
23

2.

Admitted.

3.

Paragraph 3 only asserts a legal conclusion, and therefore warrants no response. On

CITY OF SEATTLE’S ANSWER TO
COMPLAINT - 1

Peter S. Holmes
Seattle City Attorney
701 5th Avenue, Suite 2050
Seattle, WA 98104-7097
(206) 684-8200

 Case 2:18-cv-00743-RAJ Document 21 Filed 06/25/18 Page 2 of 8

1
2

that basis, the City denies the same.
4.

Admitted.
PARTIES

3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23

5.

The City is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth

of the allegations of Paragraph 5, and therefore denies the same.
6.

The City is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth

of the allegations of Paragraph 6, and therefore denies the same.
7.

The City is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth

of the allegations of Paragraph 7, and therefore denies the same.
8.

The City is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth

of the allegations of Paragraph 8, and therefore denies the same.
9.

The City is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth

of the allegations of Paragraph 9, and therefore denies the same.
10.

The City is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth

of the allegations of Paragraph 10, and therefore denies the same.
11.

The City is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth

of the allegations of Paragraph 11, and therefore denies the same.
12.

The City is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth

of the allegations of Paragraph 12, and therefore denies the same.
13.

The City is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth

of the allegations of Paragraph 13, and therefore denies the same.
14.

The City is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth

of the allegations of Paragraph 14, and therefore denies the same.

CITY OF SEATTLE’S ANSWER TO
COMPLAINT - 2

Peter S. Holmes
Seattle City Attorney
701 5th Avenue, Suite 2050
Seattle, WA 98104-7097
(206) 684-8200

 Case 2:18-cv-00743-RAJ Document 21 Filed 06/25/18 Page 3 of 8

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11

15.

The City is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth

of the allegations of Paragraph 15, and therefore denies the same.
16.

The City is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth

of the allegations of Paragraph 16, and therefore denies the same.
17.

The City is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth

of the allegations of Paragraph 17, and therefore denies the same.
18.

The City is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth

of the allegations of Paragraph 18, and therefore denies the same.
19.

The City is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth

of the allegations of Paragraph 19, and therefore denies the same.
20.

The City is a first-class city, with its own charter, located in King County, Washington.
FACTS

12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23

21.

The City admits that on March 19, 2018, the City Council passed Ordinance No.

125551. The City denies Plaintiffs’ characterization of the Ordinance as a “website ban.”
22.

In answer to Paragraph 22, the Ordinance speaks for itself. The City denies all other

allegations or characterizations of the Ordinance.
23.

The City admits that on March 30, 2018, the Mayor of Seattle signed the Ordinance.

The City denies all other allegations or characterizations of the Ordinance.
24.

The City admits the Ordinance took effect on April 29, 2018. The City denies all other

allegations or characterizations of the Ordinance.
25.

In answer to Paragraph 25, the Ordinance speaks for itself. The City denies all other

allegations or characterizations of the Ordinance.
26.

The City is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth

CITY OF SEATTLE’S ANSWER TO
COMPLAINT - 3

Peter S. Holmes
Seattle City Attorney
701 5th Avenue, Suite 2050
Seattle, WA 98104-7097
(206) 684-8200

 Case 2:18-cv-00743-RAJ Document 21 Filed 06/25/18 Page 4 of 8

1

of the allegations of Paragraph 19, and therefore denies the same.
27.

2
3

In answer to Paragraph 27, the staff memorandum speaks for itself. The City denies all

other allegations or characterizations of the Ordinance.

4

28.

Admitted.

5

29.

In answer to Paragraph 29, the Ordinance speaks for itself. The City denies all other

6

allegations or characterizations of the Ordinance.
30.

7

In answer to Paragraph 30, and by way of an affirmative answer, the Ordinance does

8

not prohibit landlords or tenants from using Rentberry, or any other website; it only prohibits the use

9

of online auctions for properties located in the City.

10

31.

Denied.

11

32.

Denied.

12

33.

In answer to Paragraph 33, SMC 7.24.130(F)(1) and SMC 7.24.150 speak for

13

themselves.
34.

14
15

of the allegations of Paragraph 34, and therefore denies the same.
35.

16
17

36.

37.

In answer to Paragraph 37, the Ordinance speaks for itself. The City denies all other

allegations or characterizations of the Ordinance.
38.

22
23

In answer to Paragraph 36, the Ordinance speaks for itself. The City denies all other

allegations or characterizations of the Ordinance.

20
21

The City is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth

of the allegations of Paragraph 35, and therefore denies the same.

18
19

The City is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth

Paragraph 38 contains only legal conclusions, and on that basis the City denies the

same.

CITY OF SEATTLE’S ANSWER TO
COMPLAINT - 4

Peter S. Holmes
Seattle City Attorney
701 5th Avenue, Suite 2050
Seattle, WA 98104-7097
(206) 684-8200

 Case 2:18-cv-00743-RAJ Document 21 Filed 06/25/18 Page 5 of 8

39.

1

The City admits that a King County Superior Court judge determined that the so-called

2

“first-in-time rule” was unconstitutional, and the City further admits that the City has appealed that

3

decision.
40.

4
5

allegations or characterizations of the Ordinance.
41.

6
7

42.

In answer to Paragraph 42, the Ordinance speaks for itself. The City denies all other

allegations or characterizations of the Ordinance.
43.

10
11

In answer to Paragraph 41, the Ordinance speaks for itself. The City denies all other

allegations or characterizations of the Ordinance.

8
9

In answer to Paragraph 40, the Ordinance speaks for itself. The City denies all other

In answer to Paragraph 43, the Ordinance speaks for itself. The City denies all other

allegations or characterizations of the Ordinance.
CLAIM FOR RELIEF

12
44.

13
14

The City’s responses in Paragraphs 1 through 43 above are incorporated here by

reference.
45.

15

The City admits the First Amendment applies to States through the Fourteenth

16

Amendment, the remainder of Paragraph 45 is a legal conclusion, and on that basis the City denies the

17

same.
46.

18

The City admits the First Amendment applies to States through the Fourteenth

19

Amendment, the remainder of Paragraph 46 is a legal conclusion, and on that basis the City denies the

20

same.

21

47.

Denied.

22

48.

Denied.

23

49.

Denied.

CITY OF SEATTLE’S ANSWER TO
COMPLAINT - 5

Peter S. Holmes
Seattle City Attorney
701 5th Avenue, Suite 2050
Seattle, WA 98104-7097
(206) 684-8200

 Case 2:18-cv-00743-RAJ Document 21 Filed 06/25/18 Page 6 of 8

1

50.

Denied.

2

51.

Denied.

3

52.

Denied.
PRAYER FOR RELIEF

4
5

A.

The City denies Plaintiffs’ claim for relief in Paragraph A.

6

B.

The City denies Plaintiffs’ claim for relief in Paragraph B.

7

C.

The City denies Plaintiffs’ claim for relief in Paragraph C.

8

AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES

9

By way of further answer and affirmative defenses, Defendant City alleges as follows:

10

1.

The City incorporates by reference its answers to all paragraphs above.

11

2.

The Plaintiffs have failed to state a claim upon which relief can be granted.

12

3.

This Court lacks subject-matter jurisdiction because one or more Plaintiffs lack

13

standing.

14

4.

15

The City reserves the right to amend, add, or delete any of its affirmative defenses

based on information learned during investigation and discovery.
DEFENDANT CITY’S PRAYER FOR RELIEF

16
17

Having fully answer the Complaint, the City prays for the following relief:

18

1.

For dismissal of Plaintiffs’ claims against the City, with prejudice;

19

2.

For an award of costs, including attorney’s fees, under 42 U.S.C. § 1988; and

20

2.

For such other relief as is just and equitable.

21

///

22

///

23

///

CITY OF SEATTLE’S ANSWER TO
COMPLAINT - 6

Peter S. Holmes
Seattle City Attorney
701 5th Avenue, Suite 2050
Seattle, WA 98104-7097
(206) 684-8200

 Case 2:18-cv-00743-RAJ Document 21 Filed 06/25/18 Page 7 of 8

1
DATED this 25th day of June, 2018.
2
PETER S. HOLMES
Seattle City Attorney

3
4

By: /s/ Michael K. Ryan
Michael K. Ryan, WSBA# 32091
Carolyn Boies, WSBA# 40395
Sara O’Connor-Kriss, WSBA# 41569

5
6
7

Assistant City Attorneys
E-mail: michael.ryan@seattle.gov
E-Mail: carolyn.boies@seattle.gov
E-Mail: sara.oconnor-kriss@seattle.gov

8
9

Seattle City Attorney’s Office
701 Fifth Avenue, Suite 2050
Seattle, WA 98104
Phone: (206) 684-8200

10
11
12

Attorneys for Defendant City of Seattle

13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
CITY OF SEATTLE’S ANSWER TO
COMPLAINT - 7

Peter S. Holmes
Seattle City Attorney
701 5th Avenue, Suite 2050
Seattle, WA 98104-7097
(206) 684-8200

 Case 2:18-cv-00743-RAJ Document 21 Filed 06/25/18 Page 8 of 8

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

1
2
3

I certify that on the 25th day of June, 2018, I caused a true and correct copy of this document
to be served on the following via ECF electronic service:

4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12

Attorneys for Plaintiffs:

Attorneys for Plaintiffs:

Brian T. Hodges,
Ethan W. Blevins
Pacific Legal Foundation
10940 Northeast 33rd Place,
Suite 210
Bellevue, Washington 98004
Telephone: (425) 576-0484
Fax: (425) 576-9565
Email: BHodges@pacificlegal.org
Email: EBlevins@pacificlegal.org

Wencong Fa
Pacific Legal Foundation
930 G Street
Sacramento, California 95814
Telephone: (916) 419-7111
Fax: (916) 419-7747
Email: WFa@pacificlegal.org

Attorneys for Plaintiffs:

13
14
15
16

James Manley
Pacific Legal Foundation
3217 East Shea Blvd., #108
Phoenix, Arizona 85028
Telephone: (916) 288-1405
Email: JManley@pacificlegal.org

17
Dated this 25th day of June, 2018
18
19

s/Michael K. Ryan
Michael K. Ryan

20
21
22
23
CITY OF SEATTLE’S ANSWER TO
COMPLAINT - 8

Peter S. Holmes
Seattle City Attorney
701 5th Avenue, Suite 2050
Seattle, WA 98104-7097
(206) 684-8200