The Daily Fuckup

The paperwork problems in OCAHO case No. 2023A00054 were not one-off glitches. They were a sequence. On January 26, 2024, respondent Pasquel Hermanos, Inc. tried to file a response to a motion to amend the complaint. The submission went to the wrong email address, did not include a certificate of service, and was not simultaneously sent to opposing counsel. Court staff rejected it on January 29 and explained how to fix the defects.

That did not end it. Also on January 29, respondent sent only a certificate of service tied to the wrong motion and exhibits. Court staff responded that the original filing had been rejected in full and that the respondent would need to submit one complete, correct filing. On January 30, the respondent tried again, but the new filing still went to the wrong email address. Its certificate of service cited the wrong date, and opposing counsel still was not copied. The court rejected that filing too.

In an order entered February 1, 2024, Administrative Law Judge Andrea R. Carroll-Tipton said the repeated problems showed the respondent had been instructed and corrected multiple times without fixing the basic filing errors. The order revoked e-filing privileges in the case and sent the parties back to the paper-filing procedures in the court rules. The complaint and the government’s motion for summary decision were not affected, but the respondent was reminded to keep track of the deadlines already set in the scheduling order.

The lesson here is not subtle. The court had already explained the rules: send filings to the correct address, include service, and make sure the other side gets them at the same time. The respondent did not do that on January 26, did not cure the defect on January 29, and did not get it right on January 30. By February 1, the court was done with the pilot-program version of patience.