IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS 

AUSTIN DIVISION 

JASON LEE VAN DYKE § 

 Plaintiff § 

 § 

v. § Case No. 1:20-MC-657 

 § 

THOMAS CHRISTOPHER RETZLAFF § 

a/k/a Dean Anderson d/b/a BV Files, Via § 

View Files L.L.C., and ViaView Files § 

 Defendant § 

PLAINTIFF’S NOTICE OF APPEAL TO DISTRICT JUDGE 

 Plaintiff, Jason Lee Van Dyke, files this notice of appeal to the district judge pursuant 

28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(A) of the order entered by the Honorable Mark Lane on July 1, 2020. 

ECC 25. Specifically, Plaintiff appeals of Section III of the order. 

1. Plaintiff has notified the district clerk in the Western District of Texas of all 

disciplinary actions taken against him in accordance with Local Rule AT-7(e). He has 

not been notified of any disciplinary action against him by the Western District of 

Texas in accordance with Local Rule AT-7, and accordingly, is entitled to access his 

CM/ECF account in this district for the purpose of representing himself as he has in the 

above-captioned case. Had Plaintiff received an order from the Court not to access his 

CM/ECF account in this district for the purpose of litigating this case on his own 

behalf, he would have obeyed it. 

2. The notion that Plaintiff has disobeyed any of the sanction or suspension orders of other 

 jurisdictions is clearly erroneous. It is contrary to both the law and the local rules. The 

 Eastern District of Texas and the Western District of Texas are two separate and 

distinct courts. They have different electronic filing systems and Plaintiff has a 

Case 1:20-mc-00657-LY Document 26 Filed 07/01/20 Page 1 of 3
different login and password for each system. However, the order entered by Magistrate 

Judge Lane treats them as though they were the same. Nevertheless, if this Court orders 

Plaintiff to stop using the CM/ECF system of the Western District of Texas for the 

purpose of representing himself in civil matters, he will certainly obey any such orders 

of the Court. 

3. The notion that Plaintiff has used the processes of this Court to launch any form of 

“vitriol” against Defendant is also erroneous. It is Mr. Retzlaff who has filed multiple 

pro se letters in this Court launching attacks of a highly personal and scandalous nature 

 against both Plaintiff and Mr. McGibney. Plaintiff’s motions to strike such scandalous 

 filings were clearly authorized under FRCP 12(f) and were denied for an improper 

purpose. This Court should reconsider and grant Plaintiff’s motion to strike. Plaintiff 

does not appeal the denial of his motion for sanctions, but does appeal the basis for its 

denial. 

WHEREFORE, PREMISES CONSIDERED, Plaintiff prays that this Court set aside the 

clearly erroneous portions of Magistrate Judge Lane’s order and enter a new order consistent 

with the law and the local rules. 

 Respectfully submitted, 

 /s/ Jason Lee Van Dyke 

 Jason Lee Van Dyke 

 PO Box 2618 

 Decatur, TX 76234 

 P – (940) 305-9242 

 E – jasonleevandyke@protonmail.com 

Case 1:20-mc-00657-LY Document 26 Filed 07/01/20 Page 2 of 3
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

I certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing was electronically filed on the 

CM/ECF System, which will automatically serve a Notice of Electronic Filing on Jeffrey 

Dorrell, attorney for Defendant, and Kristian Baehr, attorney for the United States of 

America. I further certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing has been served on 

James McGibney, by electronic means under FRCP 5(b)(2)(E). 

I further certify that, on July 1, 2020, I contacted the chambers of the Honorable Mark Lane 

to determine how to serve a copy of this motion on Magistrate Judge Lane as required by 28 

U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(A). I was informed by Court staff that, if the document is electronically 

filed, further service is unnecessary. 

 

 /s/ Jason Lee Van Dyke 

 JASON LEE VAN DYKE 

Case 1:20-mc-00657-LY Document 26 Filed 07/01/20 Page 3 of 3