Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_04-cv-02958/USCOURTS-azd-2_04-cv-02958-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 442
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights Employment
Cause of Action: 42:2000e Job Discrimination (Employment)

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

WO

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

J. W. Brantley,

Plaintiff, 

vs.

Kayenta Unified School District #27.,

William L. Allsbrooks, Administrator,

Defendants. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. CV-04-2958-PHX-LOA

ORDER

This Court has received Plaintiff’s Answers to Non-Uniform Interrogatories dated

March 2, 2006. It appears that Plaintiff has provided this Court with two originals of this

document. The docket does not reflect Plaintiff's Answers have been scanned nor docketed

therefore the Court will not order striking Plaintiff's Answers from the docket..

IT IS ORDERED returning these originals to Plaintiff and advising Plaintiff under

Local Rule 5.2, LRCiv, Rules of Practice, effective December 1, 2005 for the United States

District Court of the District of Arizona, provides the Court does not accept discovery papers

for filing . Further, a "Notice of Service" of the disclosures and discovery requests and

responses listed in Rule 5(d) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure must be filed within a

reasonable time after service of such papers.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED reminding the parties of those orders contained

within the Court's Order dated November 3, 2005 (Dkt. #54) wherein the parties were

Case 2:04-cv-02958-VAM Document 62 Filed 03/10/06 Page 1 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

- 2 -

directed to commence using the case number of CV-04-2958-PHX as this case has been

transferred to Phoenix for trial and all further matters. 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED reminding Plaintiff that counsel and any party, if

unrepresented, shall hereinafter comply with the Rules of Practice for the United States

District Court for the District of Arizona, as amended on December 1, 2005. The District’s

Rules of Practice may be found on the District Court’s internet web page at

www.azd.uscourts.gov/. All other rules may be found as www.uscourts.gov/rules/. The fact

that a party is acting pro se does not discharge this party's duties to "abide by the rules of the

court in which he litigates." Carter v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, 784 F.2d 1006,

1008 (9th Cir. 1986).

Further, I hereby recuse myself from any further action in the above-captioned matter.

IT IS ORDERED this case be reassigned, by lot, to another Judge in the District of

Arizona.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that this matter has been reassigned by random lot to

Magistrate Judge Virginia A. Mathis. All future pleadings and papers submitted for filing

shall bear the following complete case number: CV-04-2958-PHX-VAM.

DATED this 9th day of March, 2006.

Case 2:04-cv-02958-VAM Document 62 Filed 03/10/06 Page 2 of 2