It's normal[1] to give a judge a proposed order they just have to sign.
Judges don't have to care about formatting and headers. Each judge generally gets to write their own rules for how they want lawyers to format filings in their cases.
[1] Or at least I often see them when browsing through cases as an interested layperson and I've heard lawyers discussing doing it in a tone that suggests it's the norm.
you're right, in fact in California state courts it's required to submit a proposed order with a motion.
But no, each judge generally does NOT get to write their own rules of formatting. Districts (at the federal level) go to great lengths to ensure that things are uniform in that jurisdiction, for the ease of the clerk's office. Someone looking at this PDF would likely not immediately know it was an order. State courts are even more uniform, with statewide rules on typeface, font size, margin width, whether something must or can be included in a single document or broken out into a separate filing, number of lines of empty space at the top of a page, etc etc
Certainly proposed orders are very normal, especially (but not exclusively) if a resolution has been agreed to by both parties (e.g. settlement, or order by mutual stipulation).
But this was very much not that. A proposed order would match what was being argued in the attached brief, and this did pretty much the exact opposite, rejecting the arguments in the attached letter.
Judges don't have to care about formatting and headers. Each judge generally gets to write their own rules for how they want lawyers to format filings in their cases.
[1] Or at least I often see them when browsing through cases as an interested layperson and I've heard lawyers discussing doing it in a tone that suggests it's the norm.