Opinion
Civil Action No. 07-cv-02515-ZLW-CBS.
August 11, 2009
ORDER
This civil action comes before the court on Mr. Archuleta's "Petition for Inquiry" (filed August 10, 2009) (doc. # 122). Pursuant to the Order of Reference dated February 27, 2008 (doc. # 22), this civil action was referred to the Magistrate Judge to, inter alia, "[h]ear and determine pretrial matters. . . ."
1). Mr. Archuleta needs to know which Document Number is used to identify his 'Response Brief in Opposition of Summary Judgment,' which was mailed to the Court and the Defendants [] on Monday July 13, 2009? He also needs to know the date of the filing of his 'Response Brief in Opposition of Summary Judgment'?
2). Mr. Archuleta needs to know which Document Number is used to identify the 'Defendants' Reply in Support of Motion for Summary Judgment,' which was electronically filed with the Clerk of the Court on July 31, 2009 . . .?
( See doc. # 122). Contrary to Mr. Archuleta's statement, "the Court and its staff" do not "have a special responsibility to assist pro se litigants." Nevertheless, the court hereby responds to Mr. Archuleta's inquiry as follows:
1. "Plaintiff's Response Brief in Opposition of Summary Judgment" was filed on July 15, 2009 and docketed as document no. 119.
2. "Defendants' Reply in Support of Motion for Summary Judgment" was filed on July 31, 2009 and docketed as document no. 120.
3. The day that Mr. Archuleta filed his Response is excluded, thus the 15-day period for Defendants to file their Reply commenced on July 16, 2009, meaning Defendants' Reply was timely filed on July 31, 2009. ( See Fed.R.Civ.P. 6(a)).