ORDER STRIKING PLAINTIFF'S OPPOSITION;

ORDER VACATING HEARING ON MOTION FOR JUDGMENT ON THE PLEADINGS; AND

ORDER REVOKING AUTHORIZATION FOR PLAINTIFF TO FILE DOCUMENTS ELECTRONICALLY

LARRY ALAN BURNS, District Judge.

In opposition to Defendant Daniel Klein's motion for judgment on the pleadings, Plaintiff Anton Ewing filed an opposition that violates a number of the Court's orders and applicable rules, and is grossly uncivil. It is replete with insults and baseless accusations against opposing counsel, her paralegal, and Klein.

Among other things, it accuses her of perjury and of suborning the unauthorized practice of law by her paralegal. It refuses to acknowledge her as having any role in filing the motion, and instead repeatedly refers her paralegal (and occasionally Klein personally) as the motion's proponents.

It also appears to make several misrepresentations to the Court. In particular, it inaccurately claims that in case 18cv429-WQH (JMA), Ewing v. Readdick, a particular argument Klein's motion advances was found to be frivolous. In that case, the only document calling Klein's argument frivolous was Ewing's own opposition to Klein's motion to dismiss. Judge Hayes never admonished Klein for advancing a frivolous argument, as Ewing claims. And Judge Hayes later rejected Ewing's argument when he dismissed the complaint.

The opposition is over-length and violates this District's legibility requirements. See Civil Local Rule 5.1(a). It also improperly incorporates a letter Ewing mailed to opposing counsel chiding her for purported errors in her motion. There is no good reason why this letter should have been included. See Standing Order, ¶ 14 (ordering attorneys and parties to refrain from sending the Court copies of letters addressed to others). Both the contents of the letter, and the decision to include it only reflect badly on Ewing.

At a hearing on July 19, Magistrate Judge Averitte told Ewing to stop clogging up the Court with filings and contentions that do not advance the litigation. He also directed Ewing to stop making ad hominem attacks. Although at the time Ewing said he understood and would abide by Judge Averitte's orders, his opposition flouts them.

The Court has authority sua sponte to strike impertinent or scandalous matter, see Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(f)(1), and to strike filed documents for violations of rules or Court orders. See Civil Local Rule 83.1(a). The Court therefore ORDERS Ewing's opposition (Docket no. 152) is STRICKEN. The hearing on that motion and other motions, currently on calendar for Monday, August 27, 2018, at 11:30 a.m. is VACATED.

Ewing may file a new opposition by September 5, 2018. If Ewing fails to file an opposition when due, the Court may construe it as his consent to the motion's being granted. See Civil Local Rule 7.1(f)(3)(c). Klein may, if he wishes, file an amended reply brief by September 12.

Ewing is ORDERED to comply with the civility requirements of Civil Local Rule 83.4, and with Fed. R. Civ. P. 11. That applies to the opposition to Klein's motion, and more generally to the way he conducts himself in connection with litigation in this Court.

In other cases, Ewing's authorization to file documents electronically in the Court's CM/ECF system has been revoked for similar abuses. The Court now REVOKES his authorization in this case.

IT IS SO ORDERED.