Allsop, Inc. v. Dakota Trading Company, Inc. et al

Filing 8

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE by Judge James L. Robart. Attorney Erza Sutton is directed to file a motion for pro hac vice and an appearance in this suit; Response to show cause order due within 5 days of his appearance in this suit. The court orders Mr. Jones, counsel for Allsop, to serve Mr. Sutton with a copy of this order within three (3) days of the order's entry. (PM)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE 8 9 10 ALLSOP, INC., CASE NO. C17-0221JLR Plaintiff, 11 v. 12 13 DAKOTA TRADING COMPANY, INC., et al., 14 ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY SANCTIONS SHOULD NOT BE IMPOSED FOR FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH THE COURT’S LOCAL RULES Defendants. 15 Plaintiff Allsop, Inc. (“Allsop”) filed its complaint herein on February 13, 2017. 16 (Compl. (Dkt. # 1).) Instead of appearing and filing Defendant Dakota Trading 17 Company, Inc.’s (“Dakota Trading”) answer on the court’s electronic docket, Mr. Ezra 18 Sutton emailed a copy of Dakota Trading’s answer to the court’s email address that is 19 reserved for sending copies of proposed orders in WORD format to the court. (See Email 20 (Dkt. # 5).) In his July 25, 2017, email, Mr. Sutton represented that he “will . . . be 21 preparing and filing a Motion Pro Hac Vice.” (Id.) To date, however, Mr. Sutton has 22 ORDER - 1 1 filed no such motion with the court. (See generally Dkt.) Then on September 18, 2017, 2 counsel for Allsop filed a joint status report that is signed by Mr. Sutton, although Mr. 3 Sutton still has not properly appeared in this action. (See JSR (Dkt. # 7).) 4 Mr. Sutton’s actions violate the court’s Local Rules in multiple ways. First, he has 5 failed to seek pro hac vice admission and has failed to obtain local counsel. See Local 6 Rules W.D. Wash. LCR 83.1(d). Second, he has attempted to appear in this suit in a 7 manner contrary to that proscribed by the court’s Local Rules. See id., LCR 83.2. (“An 8 attorney eligible to appear may enter an appearance in a civil case by signing and filing a 9 Notice of Appearance, complaint, amended complaint, answer, amended answer, Notice 10 of Removal, motion to intervene, or motion for joinder on behalf of the party the attorney 11 represents.”). Third, he sent his client’s answer to the court in an improper manner. See 12 id., LCR 5(d) (“Unless otherwise specifically ordered by the court or directed by the 13 clerk, all counsel are required to electronically file documents through the court’s 14 electronic filing system and to comply with the electronic filing procedures for the 15 district.”). Finally, and most seriously, by signing the parties’ joint status report, he 16 certified that he is currently eligible to practice before this court, but there is no record of 17 his admission to the Western District of Washington. See id., LCR 83.3(b)(1) (“By 18 signing any document filed with the court or otherwise participating in any manner 19 before the court, an attorney certifies that he or she is currently eligible to practice before 20 the court.”); see also id., LCR 83.1(a) (“The bar of this court consists of those who have 21 been admitted to practice before this court.”). 22 ORDER - 2 1 Accordingly, the court ORDERS Mr. Sutton to (1) file a motion for pro hac vice 2 admission in this court, (2) make an appearance in this suit in accordance with the court’s 3 Local Rules, and (3) show cause why sanctions should not be imposed for his multiple 4 violations of the court’s Local Rules. The court further ORDERS Mr. Sutton to file his 5 motion for pro hac vice and make an appearance in accord with the court’s Local Rules 6 within ten (10) days of the entry of this order. In addition, the court ORDERS Mr. Sutton 7 to file his response to this order to show cause within five (5) days of his appearance in 8 this suit. Finally, because Mr. Darren Jones, counsel for Allsop, filed the joint status 9 report containing Mr. Sutton’s signature, the court ORDERS Mr. Jones to serve Mr. 10 11 Sutton with a copy of this order within three (3) days of the order’s entry. Dated this 21st day of September, 2017. 12 13 A 14 JAMES L. ROBART United States District Judge 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 ORDER - 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?