Azhar v. University of Chicago

Filing 28

MEMORANDUM Order: For the reasons stated in this memorandum order, plaintiff's counsel is ordered to 1. that the missing copy of each of the two filings be delivered to this Court's chambers forthwith and 2. that such delivery be accompanie d by a check for $200 payable to the "Clerk of the District Court" by reason of the LR 5.2(f) violations ($100 for each violation), a requirement foreshadowed by the opening provision in this Court's website. Signed by the Honorable Milton I. Shadur on 2/28/2017:Mailed notice(clw, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
EASTERN DIVISION

SAMEENA AZHAR,
Plaintiff,
v.
BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE
UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO,
Defendant.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No. 16 C 10390

MEMORANDUM ORDER
Although the University of Chicago's motion to dismiss a portion of the complaint in this
action has been met with the filing by plaintiff Sameena Azhar ("Azhar") of both (1) a Second
Amended Complaint on February 13 and (2) a response to the motion on February 20, in each
instance Azhar's counsel has ignored the explicit directive of this District Court's LR 5.2(f) and
of this Court's corresponding website provision that require the delivery of a paper copy of every
such filing for this Court's use within one business day after filing. 1 Indeed, to underscore the
importance of the LR 5.2(f) requirement to the case management procedures followed by this
Court, the first paragraph in its website expressly repeats that requirement, adding that a delivery

1

In an effort to monitor compliance with that requirement (which has regrettably not
always been adhered to by lawyers), both this Court's judicial assistant and its courtroom deputy
maintain lists of all deliveries by counsel to this Court's chambers. Although that recordkeeping
is intended to be error-free, if Azhar's counsel were to establish that what is said in this
memorandum order about nondelivery is in error, the sanction called for by this memorandum
order will of course be rescinded.

to this Court's chambers on the date of filing, if possible, would be appreciated (although such
earlier delivery is not essential).
Despite the literal one-business-day requirement of LR 5.2(f), this Court has customarily
allowed a grace period -- typically at least a week 2 -- before issuing this type of memorandum
order. In this instance that added time has elapsed without compliance by Azhar's counsel, and
this Court hereby orders:
1.

that the missing copy of each of the two filings be delivered to this Court's
chambers forthwith and

2.

that such delivery be accompanied by a check for $200 payable to the
"Clerk of the District Court" by reason of the LR 5.2(f) violations ($100
for each violation), a requirement foreshadowed by the opening provision
in this Court's website.

__________________________________________
Milton I. Shadur
Senior United States District Judge
Date: February 28, 2017

2

That grace period varies somewhat from case to case, the result of this Court's
obtaining the Clerk's Office printouts reflecting case filings only sporadically rather than on a
regular (say weekly) basis.

-2-