Karra J. Porter, 5223 

Scott T. Evans, 6218 

CHRISTENSEN & JENSEN, P.C. 

257 East 200 South, Suite 1100 

Salt Lake City, Utah 84111 

Telephone: (801) 323-5000 

Karra.Porter@chrisjen.com 

Scott.Evans@chrisjen.com 

Attorneys for Defendant

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

DISTRICT OF UTAH, CENTRAL DIVISION 

FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION, 

 Plaintiff, 

v. 

JEREMY JOHNSON, 

 Defendant. 

DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO DISMISS 

PLAINTIFF’S COMPLAINT (AS 

IMPROPERLY FILED BY AN 

ATTORNEY NOT LICENSED OR 

ADMITTED IN UTAH)

Civil No. 2:15CV00439 TC 

District Judge Dee Benson 

 By and through counsel, Defendant Jeremy Johnson hereby submits the following motion 

in support of its motion to dismiss the Federal Election Commission’s Complaint because it was 

not filed by an attorney licensed in the state of Utah. 

PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND 

 1. On June 19, 2015, the Federal Election Commission filed a Civil Cover Sheet 

(Docket No. 1) and Complaint (Docket No. 2). 

 2. Neither the Complaint nor the Civil Cover Sheet was filed or signed by an 

attorney admitted to practice before the Court (hereinafter referred to generally as “local 

counsel”). See id.

Case 2:15-cv-00439-DB Document 13 Filed 09/08/15 Page 1 of 4
2 

 3. On the same day, the originally assigned Judge (the Hon. Tena Campbell) issued 

an order of recusal and the case was reassigned to the Hon. Dee Benson. (Docket No. 3) 

 4. After filing the Complaint, the Federal Election Commission filed a Motion for 

Waiver of Local Counsel Rules (Docket No. 4). The FEC did not file, and has never filed, a 

motion for admission pro hac vice. 

 5. Defendant opposed the FEC’s motion on August 3, 2015, and granted the FEC an 

extension of time to file its reply on the FEC’s motion to September 8, 2015. 

 6. No order has been granted authorizing FEC counsel (who are neither licensed nor 

otherwise admitted in Utah ). Nor does the proposed order submitted by the Federal Election 

Commission seek to grant such authority retroactively. (See Docket No. 4 exh. B.) 

 7. Until and unless the complaint is filed by a properly licensed or admitted attorney, 

the Complaint has not been filed.1

ARGUMENT 

 THE FEC’S COMPLAINT WAS NOT FILED BY AN ATTORNEY 

 LICENSED OR OTHERWISE ADMITTED IN UTAH. AS SUCH, IT IS 

 NOT PROPERLY FILED, AND IT SHOULD BE DISMISSED. 

 As reflected on the face of the Complaint and by the court’s own docket, the Complaint 

in this case was filed by an attorney who is neither licensed nor otherwise admitted to practice in 

Utah. The wording, purpose, and scope of the rules requiring an authorized signator have been 

set forth in Defendant’s Memorandum in Opposition to Plaintiff’s Motion for Waiver of Local 

Counsel Rules (Docket No. 10), a copy of which is attached hereto as Exh. A. 

 

1

 At most, the existing Complaint might “ripen” on the date that an order is signed authorizing 

the FEC to file pleadings in the case (if the FEC’s motion is granted over defendant’s objection). 

Case 2:15-cv-00439-DB Document 13 Filed 09/08/15 Page 2 of 4
3 

 To avoid duplication and because this motion is dependent on resolution of the prior 

motion, the briefing in Docket No. 10 is incorporated herein (and attached hereto). In short: 

Until and unless it is filed by an attorney authorized to sign and file pleadings, no Complaint has 

properly been filed in this case by the Federal Election Commission, and the purported 

“Complaint” on file as Docket No. 1 should be dismissed.2

CONCLUSION 

 For the reasons set forth above, Defendant respectfully requests that Plaintiff’s Complaint 

be dismissed. 

 DATED this 8th day of September, 2015. 

 CHRISTENSEN & JENSEN, P.C. 

 /s/ Karra J. Porter 

 Karra J. Porter 

 Scott T. Evans 

 Attorneys for Defendant 

 

2

 Ordinarily, defendant would have awaited the outcome of the FEC’s pending motion to waive 

local counsel requirements before filing a motion to dismiss on this ground. However, despite 

the pending dispute over whether a complaint has properly been filed at all, the FEC has taken 

the position that defendant is required to respond regardless of the need for clarification from the 

court, and that it intends to seek a default judgment. In response, defendant advised the FEC of 

his intent to proceed with this motion to dismiss. 

Case 2:15-cv-00439-DB Document 13 Filed 09/08/15 Page 3 of 4
4 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

 I HEREBY CERTIFY that on this 8th day of September, 2015, I electronically filed with 

the Clerk of the Court of the foregoing MOTION TO DISMISS by using the Court’s CM/ECF 

system, which sent notification of such filing to the following: 

Lisa J. Stevenson 

Deputy General Counsel – Law 

lstevenson@fec.gov 

Harry J. Summers 

Assistant General Counsel 

hsummers@fec.gov 

Kevin Deeley 

Acting Associate General Counsel 

kdeeley@fec.gov

Kevin P. Hancock 

Attorney 

khancock@fec.gov 

Attorneys for Plaintiff Federal Election Commission

 /s/ Anne L. MacLeod, Secretary 

Case 2:15-cv-00439-DB Document 13 Filed 09/08/15 Page 4 of 4