Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-casd-3_08-cv-01798/USCOURTS-casd-3_08-cv-01798-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 220
Nature of Suit: Foreclosure
Cause of Action: 18:241 Conspiracy Against Citizen Rights

---

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

08cv1798

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

WARREN BRAD JOHNSON,

Plaintiff,

v.

TIMOTHY WENNES, et al.,

Defendants .

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Civil No. 08cv1798-L(JMA)

ORDER re: “AFFIDAVIT OF

TRUTH”

Defendants Timothy Wennes; Countrywide Bank, FSB; Countrywide Home Loans, Inc.;

Countrywide Financial Corporation; and Bank of America (collectively “defendants”) filed a

motion to dismiss or alternatively for a more definite statement [doc. #5] to which plaintiff has

responded in opposition [doc. #8]. The motion has been fully briefed as set forth in Civil Local

Rule 7.1.e. Nevertheless, on November 4, 2008, plaintiff Warren Brad Johnson, who is

proceeding pro se, sent an “affidavit of truth” to the Clerk of the Court for filing in the abovecaptioned case. The Civil Local Rules do not provide for supplemental briefing or submissions

after a motion has been fully briefed; therefore, in order to file a supplemental document such as

plaintiff’s “affidavit of truth”, plaintiff is required to seek leave of Court. He has not done so.

The Court further notes that plaintiff’s Certificate of Service indicates that he has mailed

his “affidavit of truth” to the Court but it does not state that he has served opposing counsel with

this document. Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 5(a) requires service of every document filed on

Case 3:08-cv-01798-L-JMA Document 14 Filed 11/05/08 Page 1 of 4
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

1 In plaintiff’s Proof of Service, he references California Code of Civil Procedure

but because he is proceeding in the federal court, plaintiff must rely on the Federal Rules of Civil

Procedure. 

2 08cv1798

the opposing party or counsel and proof of service of all documents on the opposing party or

counsel. see FED. R. CIV. P. 5(b)(1) and (d); see also CIV. L.R. 5.2.1

 The Electronic Case Filing

Administrative Policies and Procedures Manual further provides that “[i]f time is an issue, nonregistered filers must provide a paper copy of the document(s) to all parties.” ECF §2(d)(2).

Plaintiff is admonished that he must serve upon defendants or, if appearance has been

entered by counsel, upon defendants’ counsel, a copy of every further pleading or document

submitted for consideration by the Court. Plaintiff shall include with the original paper to be

filed with the Clerk of the Court a certificate stating the manner in which a true and correct copy

of any document was served on defendants or counsel for defendants and the date of service. 

Any paper received by a district judge or a magistrate judge that has not been filed with the

Clerk of the Court or which fails to include a certificate of service will be disregarded by the

court.

Although the Court is mindful of plaintiff’s pro se status, he must comply with the

Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and the Civil Local Rules for the United States District Court

for the Southern District of California. “District judges have no obligation to act as counsel or

paralegal to pro se litigants.” Pliler v. Ford, 542 U.S. 225, 231 (2004); see also Springer v. Best,

264 F.2d 24, 25 (9th Cir.1959)(it has never been the court's function “to supervise laymen in the

practice of law.”); Jacobsen v. Filler, 790 F.2d 1362, 1365 (9th Cir.1986) (“it is not for the trial

court to inject itself into the adversary process on behalf of one class of litigant”). “Pro se

litigants are not excused from following court rules,” Briones v. Riviera Hotel & Casino, 116

F.3d 379, 382 (9th Cir. 1997), and they “must follow the same rules of procedure that govern

other litigants.” King v. Atiyeh, 814 F.2d 565, 567 (9th Cir.1987). Plaintiff is advised that future

failure to comply with the Rules of Court may result in sanctions being imposed upon him.

Although plaintiff has not sought leave of Court to file his “affidavit of truth”, the Court

will permit the filing of this document so long as plaintiff files a certificate of service that attests

Case 3:08-cv-01798-L-JMA Document 14 Filed 11/05/08 Page 2 of 4
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 Although plaintiff does not state the purpose for his “affidavit of truth”, the Court

assumes that it is intended to offer additional support for his opposition to defendants’ motion to

dismiss even though the document appears to be irrelevant to determining the merits of

defendants’ motion. 

3 08cv1798

to the fact that defendants’ counsel has been served with his “affidavit of truth.” Failure to serve

defendants’ counsel within five days of the filing of this Order shall result in the striking of the

“affidavit of truth” from the record. If plaintiff intends to further supplement his opposition to

defendants’ motion to dismiss2

, he must seek leave of Court prior to submitting the document(s)

to the Court. 

Based on the foregoing, IT IS ORDERED directing the Clerk of the Court to file

plaintiff’s “affidavit of truth”. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that plaintiff shall serve opposing

counsel with his “affidavit of truth” and file with the Clerk of the Court a certificate of service

attesting to such service on defendants’ counsel within five days of the filing of this Order. 

Failure to serve opposing counsel and to file a certificate of service with respect to the “affidavit

of truth” within the time provided shall result in the “affidavit of truth” being stricken from the

record.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: November 5, 2008

M. James Lorenz

United States District Court Judge

COPY TO: 

HON. JAN M. ADLER

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

ALL PARTIES/COUNSEL

Case 3:08-cv-01798-L-JMA Document 14 Filed 11/05/08 Page 3 of 4
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

4 08cv1798

Case 3:08-cv-01798-L-JMA Document 14 Filed 11/05/08 Page 4 of 4