T hi s di s pos i t i on i s n o t ap p ro p ri at e fo r p u b l i c a t i on a nd i s notpr e c e de nt * e xc e pta s pr ovi de d by N i nth C i r c ui tR ul e 36- 3. NOT F OR P UB L I CAT I ON UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS FOR T HE NI NTH CI RC UI T
A N TH O N Y W O H LLA I B, P l ai nt i ff

, a nd CH RI STO PH ER D EN I S K U EBLER, A p p e lla n t,
v. U N I TED STA TES D I STRI CT CO U RT F OR T HE WE S T E RN D I S T R I C T OF W ASHI NG TON, SE ATTL E, A pp el l ee , a nd I C I C L E S E A F O O D S , I N C ., D e f

e n d a n t. N o. 09- 35861 D. C
. No
. 2 : 0 7
- c v - 0 0 0 8 0
- R AJ
ME MOR AN DU M *

A pp ea l fr om the U ni t ed S t at es D i stri ctC ou rt f orthe W e s t e rn D i s tr i c tof W a s hi ngt on R i c ha r d A
. J one s , D i s tr i c tJ udge , P r e s i di ng 

# FI LED SEP 16 2010 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U
. S. C O U R T OF APPE ALST he pa ne l una ni m ous l y c onc l ude s t h i s c a s e i s s u i t a b l e f o r de c i s i on ** w ith o u t o r a l a r g u m e n t. See F ed. R
. A pp . P
. 34 (a )( 2). 2 S ubm i tt e d S e pt e m be r2, 2010 ** S e a tt l e , W a s hi ngt on B efo re: H A W K IN S , M cK E O W N an d B E A , C i rcu i tJu d g es. P l ai n t i ff’ s co u n sel , C h ri st o p h er K u eb l er, ap p eal s th e d i stri ctco u rt ’ s s u a s p o n te i m pos i t i on of

a $5, 000 s a nc t i on, c l a i m i ng R u l e 1 1 of C i vi l P r oc e dur e pr ohi bi t s the
s a nc t i on be c a us e the pa r t i e s ha d a l r e a dy s e tt l e d the unde r l y i ng c a s e . B y no m e a ns
c ount e na nc i ng the be ha vi oroc c a s i oni ng the s a nc t i on, w e a gr e e w i th K ue bl e r ’ s r e a di ng
o f R u l e 1 1 , an d h av i n g d et erm i n ed th e p art i es’ M ed i atio n A g reem en tw as a

“ s e tt l e m e nt ” f

orR ul e 11 purpos e s , w e r e ve r s e a nd r e m a nd. Ru l e 1 1 c l e a r l y p r o h i b i t s ad i s tr i c t c o u r tf r o m s u a s

p o n te is s u in g a n o r d e rto
s how c a us e w hy the c our ts houl d noti m pos e am one t a ry s a nc t i on i f the pa r t i e s ha ve al re ady s ett l ed a c as e. F ed. R
. C i v. P
. 11 (c )( 5) (“ T he court m u stno ti m po se a
m o n e ta ry s a n c tio n . . . o n its o w n , u n le s s it is s u e d th e s h o w - c a u s e o r d e ru n d e r R u le 11( c ) ( 3) be f

or e vol unt a ry di s m i s s a l ors e tt l e m e ntof the c l a i m s m a de by ora ga i ns tthe party thati s, or w ho se att orneys ar e, t o b e s anct i on ed. ”) ; s e e al s o C ha r l e s A l a n W r i ght & A r th u rR . M ille r , Feder alP ract i ce an d P roce du re § 1 3 3 6 .3 ( 3 d e d . 2 0 0 4 )
. H e r e , th e s ig n e d M e d ia tio n A g r e e m e n t w a s as e ttle m e n t a n d w a s e n te r e d in to b ef o re th e d istrict c o u rt issu ed it s O rd er to S h o w C au se . T h e M ed iati o n A g re em en t’ s3

re qu i re m entof re m ov al of the offendi ng l angu age f rom the di stri ctcourtfi l i ng s w as
a p a r t o f p e r f o rm a n c e r a th e rth a n a c o n d itio n o f c o n tr a c t f

o r m a t i o n . Se e T

a c o ma No r th p a rk , LLC v
. NW

, LLC , 96 P
. 3d 454, 457 ( W a s h. C t . A pp. 2004) ( quot i ng R o ss
v . H ar di ng , 3 9 1 P .2 d 5 2 6 , 5 3 0 ( W a s h . 1 9 6 4 ) ) ; s e e a ls o C a m a c h o v . C ity o f Sa n L u is , 359 F e d. A ppx. 794, 796–97 ( 9th C i r . 2009) ( appl y i ng A ri zo n a contr a c tl a w t o a si m i l ar l y s i tuat ed appeal of the enforce abi l i ty o f ase tt l em entagre em enti n A ri zona). P a r t i c ul a r l y gi ve n ours t a t e m e nt s e m pha s i z i ng our “ f i rm [ ] c om m i t [ m e nt ] t o the rul e that the l aw fa vo rs and encou ra ges c om prom i se se tt l em ent s, ” A hern v. C ent . P ac. Fre i gh t L i nes , 846 F
. 2d 47, 48 ( 9th C i r . 1988) , the di s tr i c tc our te rr e d i n c onc l udi ng th e M e d ia tio n A g r e e m e n t w a s n o t as e ttle m e n t f o rth e p u rp o s e s o f

R u le 1 1
. O f c our s e , r e ve r s i ng the m one t a ry s a nc t i on i s notne c e s s a r i l y a l oophol e thr ough
w h ich K u eb ler ca n es ca p e sa n ctio n fo r b eh av io r in ten d ed to h ar as s o p p o sin g co u n se l’ s l aw fi rm . A l tho ug h i ti s pre fe rabl e thata di stri ctcourti m po se sa n ctions before is s u in g a f

in a l o r d e r , th e te x t o f

R u le 1 1 d o e s n o t p la c e a tim e lim it o n a c o u r t’s ab ility to s a n c tio n . See 2 J a m e s W m . M o o r e , Moo re ’s Feder alP ract i ce , §11. 22[ 2] [ a ] ( 3d.
e d. 2010)
. T hus , w e r e m a nd f or the di s tr i c tc our tt o c ons i de rw he the rs om e a l t e rna t i ve
s a n c tio n is ap p r o p r ia te to e n s u r e K u e b le ris d e te rr e d f r o m s im ila r litig a tio n ta c tic s in th e f u tu r e . See W r ig h t a n d M ille r , su p ra , a t§ 1336. 3 n. 70. RE V E RS E D a n d RE MAND E D.