Filing 17

ORDER STRIKING MOTION TO DISMISS SHOW CAUSE ORDER: This Court GRANTS the motion to strike (Dkt. No. 15 ). The Clerk is DIRECTED to strike Mr. Mumfords motion to dismiss (Dkt. No. 14 ). Signed on November 19, 2017 by Honorable John C. Coughenour. (eo)

Download PDF
THE HONORABLE JOHN C. COUGHENOUR 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON PORTLAND DIVISION IN RE MARCUS R. MUMFORD. CASE NO. 3:17-cv-0348-JCC 10 ORDER STRIKING MOTION TO 11 DISMISS SHOW CAUSE ORDER 12 13 14 15 This matter comes before the Court on attorney Marcus Mumford’s motion to dismiss the 16 order to show cause why his pro hac vice admission to the District of Oregon should not be 17 revoked (Dkt. No. 14) and the District of Oregon’s motion to strike (Dkt. No. 15). Having 18 thoroughly considered the briefing and the relevant record, the Court GRANTS the motion to 19 strike (Dkt. No. 15) for the reasons explained herein. 20 Mr. Mumford was granted pro hac vice admission in the matter of United States v. 21 Ammon Bundy. See Case No. CR16-0051-BR, Dkt. No. 665 (D. Or. 2016). During the resulting 22 trial, Mr. Mumford refused to observe court rulings, argued with the court, commented on the 23 testimony of a witness in the presence of the jury, violated an order from the court by allowing a 24 fact witness to observe the trial when not testifying, and argued for his client’s release from 25 custody following acquittal despite a pre-existing custody order for his client in another case. 26 Case No. CR16-0051-BR, Dkt. No. 2069 (D. Or. 2016). His actions violated the standards for ORDER STRIKING MOTION TO DISMISS SHOW CAUSE ORDER MC17-0348-JCC PAGE - 1 1 professional conduct. See D. Or. Local Civ. R. 83-7. Based on this behavior, the District of 2 Oregon issued an order for Mr. Mumford to show cause why his pro hac vice admission should 3 not be revoked. Id. 1 4 Mr. Mumford filed a motion to extend the time to respond and to clarify the show cause 5 order. Case No. CR16-0051-BR, Dkt. No. 2084. The District of Oregon clarified the show cause 6 order, granted Mr. Mumford an extension of time to respond, and sua sponte recused itself from 7 further proceedings in the matter. CR16-0051-BR, Dkt. Nos. 2087, 2100, 2101. This Court was 8 designated for further proceedings. Id. at 2101. Following the appointment of counsel to 9 represent the District of Oregon, Case No. CR16-0051-BR, Dkt. No. 2145, this Court issued an 10 order approving a stipulated briefing schedule and granting Mr. Mumford a January 8, 2018 11 evidentiary hearing on the show cause order. CR16-0051-BR, Dkt. No. 2192. 12 Despite agreeing to the stipulated briefing schedule, Mr. Mumford again sought a series 13 of extensions to respond to the show cause order, which this Court granted. (Dkt. Nos. 5, 9.) But 14 despite these extensions, Mr. Mumford filed only a provisional response, providing no date 15 certain for a final response. (Dkt. No. 7-1.) This Court advised Mr. Mumford that it would accept 16 no further briefing on the matter from him, as the District of Oregon needed time to prepare its 17 brief in opposition to Mr. Mumford’s provisional response prior to the scheduled evidentiary 18 hearing. (Dkt. No. 13.) 19 Despite the Court’s clear instructions (Dkt. No. 13 at 1), Mr. Mumford now moves to 20 dismiss the show cause order. (Dkt. No. 14.) He attacks the merits of the allegations contained 21 within the show cause order, questions the jurisdiction of the District of Oregon in issuing the 22 order, alleges insufficient notice, and asserts other procedural infirmities. (Id. at 1–47.) Mr. 23 24 25 26 1 This Court established a new case number, MC17-0348-JCC, for the show cause proceeding, separate and apart from United States vs. Bundy, Case No. CR16-0051-BR. This followed the filing of a number of documents in the show cause matter under the case number for United States vs. Bundy. References in this order to docket numbers without an associated case number are to documents associated with the new case number. (See Dkt. No. 2.) ORDER STRIKING MOTION TO DISMISS SHOW CAUSE ORDER MC17-0348-JCC PAGE - 2 1 Mumford provides no legal basis for this Court to consider his motion to dismiss, particularly in 2 light of this Court’s past orders. Furthermore, he makes the same allegations in his provisional 3 response as he does in his motion to dismiss. (Compare Dkt. No. 7-1 at 2–129 with Dkt. No. 14 4 at 1–47.) Therefore, this Court GRANTS the motion to strike (Dkt. No. 15). The Clerk is 5 DIRECTED to strike Mr. Mumford’s motion to dismiss (Dkt. No. 14). 6 7 DATED this 19th day of November, 2017. A 8 9 10 John C. Coughenour UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 ORDER STRIKING MOTION TO DISMISS SHOW CAUSE ORDER MC17-0348-JCC PAGE - 3

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?