Opinion
C23-0936JLR
06-26-2023
WARD K. CAPSTICK, Plaintiff, v. THE BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON, et al., Defendants.
MINUTE ORDER
The following minute order is made by the direction of the court, the Honorable James L. Robart:
The court is in receipt of the pleading filed by pro se Plaintiff Ward K. Capstick entitled “emergency ex-parte temporary restraining order.” (Compl. (Dkt. # 1) (capitalization omitted).) Because the substance of this pleading is similar to that of a complaint (see generally id.), and because Mr. Capstick used this pleading to commence his case (see generally Dkt.), the court construes the pleading as Mr. Capstick's complaint. See McGuckin v. Smith, 974 F.2d 1050, 1055 (9th Cir. 1992) (noting that the court liberally construes a pro se litigant's pleadings).
If Mr. Capstick seeks a temporary restraining order, he must file a separate motion requesting that relief. Mr. Capstick's motion, if any, shall comply with the procedures set forth in Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 65(b) and Local Rules W.D. Wash. LCR 65(b). See also King v. Atiyeh, 814 F.2d 565, 567 (9th Cir. 1987) (stating that pro se litigants must follow same rules of procedure that govern other litigants), overruled on other grounds by Lacey v. Maricopa Cnty., 693 F.3d 896, 925, 928 (9th Cir. 2012). In addition, Mr. Capstick must file a proposed order with his motion that complies with the requirements of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 65(d)(1) (setting forth the requirements for an order granting injunctive relief) and Local Rules W.D. Wash. LCR 65(b)(4) (requiring that the movant “include a proposed order specifically setting forth the relief requested and describing in reasonable detail the act or acts to be restrained or required”). See also Local Rules W.D. Wash. LCR 7(b)(1) (noting that a party must file a proposed order in conjunction with a motion)