Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Appellee, v. Randall Brian JARVIS, also known as Christopher Michaelson, also known as Josiah Richards, also known as Order of Jesus Christ's Disciples, also known as Order of Christian Disciples, also known as Church of Jesus Christ Disciples, also known as Christian Disciples International, Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2004-05-27
Citations: 97 F. App'x 77
Docket Number: No. 03-3042
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Appellee, v. Randall Brian JARVIS, also known as Christopher Michaelson, also known as Josiah Richards, also known as Order of Jesus Christ’s Disciples, also known as Order of Christian Disciples, also known as Church of Jesus Christ Disciples, also known as Christian Disciples International, Appellant.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 97
Pages: 77–78

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Appellee, v. Randall Brian JARVIS, also known as Christopher Michaelson, also known as Josiah Richards, also known as Order of Jesus Christ’s Disciples, also known as Order of Christian Disciples, also known as Church of Jesus Christ Disciples, also known as Christian Disciples International, Appellant.
No. 03-3042.
United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.
Submitted: May 21, 2004.
Decided: May 27, 2004.
Hilarie Snyder, Paula Speck, Thomas J. Clark, Jeffrey S. Swyers, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for PlaintiffAppellee.
Randall Brian Jarvis, Jameson, MO, pro se.
Before BYE, MCMILLIAN, and RILEY, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
Randall Brian Jarvis (Jarvis) appeals the district court's order granting the government a default judgment against him for a permanent injunction. We conclude that the court did not abuse its discretion. See Forsythe v. Hales, 255 F.3d 487, 490 (8th Cir.2001) (standard of review). Jarvis failed to respond to the complaint; thereafter, in violation of court rules, he attempted to submit by facsimile his response to the government's motion for a default order, and then did not cure the problem by submitting a proper filing after the court informed him that his fae simile would not be accepted; and he did not respond to the court's two show-cause orders. Jarvis's arguments on the merits are thus irrelevant. See Ackra Direct Mktg. Corp. v. Fingerhut Corp., 86 F.3d 852, 857 (8th Cir.1996); Brown v. Kenron Aluminum, & Glass Corp., 477 F.2d 526, 531 (8th Cir.1973).
Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.
. The Honorable Gary A. Fenner, United States District Judge for the Western District of Missouri.