Kevin Scott Ewing v. Sedro-Woolley Municipal Court et al.

• Court: District Court, W.D. Washington
• Decided: January 9, 2026
• Docket: 2:25-cv-02448
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

1 2

3 4 5 6 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON 8 AT SEATTLE

9 10 KEVIN SCOTT EWING, CASE NO. C25-2448JLR 11 Plaintiff, ORDER v. 12 SEDRA-WOOLLEY MUNICIPAL 13 COURT et al., 14 Defendants. 15 Before the court are two motions filed by pro se Plaintiff Kevin Scott Ewing: (1) a 16 motion to strike Defendants’ notice of appearance and (2) a motion to compel verification 17 of credentials of Defendants’ counsel. (MTS (Dkt. # 8); MTC (Dkt. # 9).) The court 18 DENIES both motions. 19 First, in his motion to strike, Mr. Ewing asks the court to strike Defendants’ 20 attorneys’ notices of appearance as “premature, immaterial, and impertinent” under 21 Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(f) because the attorneys filed their notices of 22 1 appearance before Mr. Ewing completed service of process on Defendants. (MTS at 1; 2 see also 12/11/25 Not. of App. (Dkt. # 4); 12/15/25 Not. of App. (Dkt. # 6).) The court

3 denies Mr. Ewing’s motion because attorneys may enter an appearance in a matter before 4 their client is served. 5 Second, Mr. Ewing asks the court to compel counsel for Defendants to produce 6 “exhaustive verification of their core credentials of authority to appear and act in this 7 [c]ourt.” (MTC at 1.) Mr. Ewing asserts that his request to inspect the credentials of 8 opposing counsel arises from Defendants’ attorneys’ purportedly premature notices of

9 appearance and “supplements” his motion to strike. (MTC at 2.) Because the court 10 denies his motion to strike, it also denies his motion to compel. 11 Although Mr. Ewing is proceeding pro se, he must nevertheless comply with the 12 Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and this District’s Local Civil Rules. See, e.g., Briones 13 v. Riviera Hotel & Casino, 116 F.3d 379, 381 (9th Cir. 1997) (setting forth that a pro se

14 litigant must follow the same rules of procedure that govern other litigants). The court 15 advises Mr. Ewing to review the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure1, this District’s Local 16 Civil Rules2, and this District’s guidance for pro se litigants3 prior to filing any additional 17 18

19 1 The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure can be found here: Federal Rules of Civil 20 Procedure | Federal Rules of Civil Procedure | US Law | LII / Legal Information Institute. 2 This District’s Local Civil Rules can be found here: Local Rules and General Orders | Western District of Washington | United States District Court. 21 3 Guidance for pro se litigants litigating in the Western District of Washington can be found here: Representing Yourself ("Pro Se") | Western District of Washington | United States 22 District Court. 1 motions. Further filing of frivolous motions could result in sanctions, including dismissal 2 of the case.

3 4 Dated this 9th day of January, 2026. A 5 JAMES L. ROBART 6 United States District Judge 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18

19 20 21 22