United States of America v. Smith
Filing
24
ORDER denying 20 Defendant's Motion for Reconsideration. Signed by Judge David G Campbell on 4/8/11.(LSP)
1
WO
2
3
4
5
6
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
7
FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA
8
9
United States of America,
Plaintiff,
10
11
vs.
12
Robert F. Smith, Sr.,
13
Defendant.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
No. CV10-2358 PHX DGC
ORDER
14
15
Pro se Defendant Robert F. Smith, Sr. moves for reconsideration of this Court’s
16
March 22, 2011, order (“the Order”) denying his motion to dismiss (Doc. 19). Doc. 20.
17
Defendant argues the Order incorrectly noted that he did not file a reply bringing forth
18
evidence to rebut the presumption of regularity attending Plaintiff’s filing of this case, and
19
requests the Order be reconsidered in light of the reply appearing on the docket with a filing
20
date of March 21, 2011. Id.
21
Pro se plaintiffs are expected to abide by the rules of the court in which they litigate.
22
Carter v. Comm’r of Internal Revenue, 784 F.2d 1006, 1008 (9th Cir. 1986). Plaintiff’s
23
response to Defendant’s motion to dismiss was filed and served by mail on February 28,
24
2011. Doc. 15 at 8; Fed. R. Civ. P. 5(b)(2)(C). Defendant had seven days within which to
25
reply, LRCiv. 7.2(d), and this period was automatically extended to ten days due to service
26
by mail, Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(e). Defendant asserts that his reply was mailed on March 18, 2011
27
(Doc. 20 at 1:35-36), several days beyond the reply deadline mentioned above. Defendant
28
has not shown good cause for the delay either in the reply or in the motion for
1
reconsideration. Docs. 18, 20. The reply was, therefore, untimely and the Court properly
2
declined to consider it.1
3
IT IS ORDERED that Defendant’s motion for reconsideration (Doc. 20) is denied.
4
DATED this 8th day of April, 2011.
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
1
Even if the reply had been timely, its arguments are not persuasive and it proffers
no evidence to rebut the presumption of regularity in Plaintiff’s filing of this case.
-2-
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?