Andrews-Byrd v. National Records & Archives Administration

Filing 24

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER : IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff is PROHIBITED from submitting any further pro se filings in this closed case, except for a notice of appeal. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of Court shall return, unfiled, to Plaintif f any documents or photographs that Plaintiff has attempted to file pro se in this case since the entry of the Court's Order of Dismissal, except for any notice of appeal, and any future pro se filings Plaintiff attempts to make in this closed case, except for a notice of appeal. Signed by District Judge Matthew T. Schelp on 03/07/2025. (KCD)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI
EASTERN DIVISION
COURTNEY D. ANDREWS-BYRD,
Plaintiff,
v.
NATIONAL RECORDS &
ARCHIVESADMINISTRATION,
Defendant.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

No. 4:24-cv-01285-MTS

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This closed employment discrimination matter is before the Court on its own
motion. Almost daily, Plaintiff has been submitting through the self-represented litigant’s
email address various papers and photographs that have no relevance to her case. For
example, Plaintiff has submitted various pictures of trash bins, pictures of laundry, pictures
of prescription drugs, high school track schedules, handwritten journal entries, and birth
and marriage certificates, just to name a few. These items violate Local Rule 2.01 as they
are not in the proper format. For example, they are not signed, have no case number, and
do not appear to be exhibits to any pleading, motion, or memorandum. See also Fed. R.
Civ. P. 11(a). Additionally, these items violate Local Rule 4.04 as Plaintiff is attempting
to communicate with the Court by means other than motion or memorandum. These
attempted filings have wasted the Court’s limited resources because the Clerk is having to
review irrelevant documents and photographs in a closed case. To prevent further waste

of the Court’s resources, the Court will prohibit Plaintiff from submitting any further pro
se filings in this closed case, except for a notice of appeal.
Accordingly,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff is PROHIBITED from submitting any
further pro se filings in this closed case, except for a notice of appeal.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of Court shall return, unfiled, to
Plaintiff any documents or photographs that Plaintiff has attempted to file pro se in this
case since the entry of the Court’s Order of Dismissal, except for any notice of appeal, and
any future pro se filings Plaintiff attempts to make in this closed case, except for a notice
of appeal.
Dated this 7th day of March 2025.

MATHEW T. SCHELP
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE