Patten v. United States of America

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW MEXICO
LISA ANN PATTEN,
as Personal Representative of the
ESTATE OF ROBERT DENNIS PATTEN,
Plaintiff,
v. 	No. 1:26-cv-01610-KK1
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Defendant.
NOTICE AND ORDER REGARDING CASE MANAGEMENT AND
ORDER REGARDING REPRESENTATION OF THE ESTATE
THIS MATTER comes before the Court on pro se Plaintiff’s Complaint for Wrongful
Death and Survival Action, Doc. 1, filed May 18, 2026. 	The Court notifies Plaintiff of the
following regarding case management.
Generally, pro se litigants are held to the same standards of professional
responsibility as trained attorneys. It is a pro se litigant’s responsibility to become
familiar with and to comply with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and the Local
Rules of the United States District Court for the District of New Mexico (the “Local
Rules”).
1 The Clerk's Office assigned the undersigned to this case for review pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915
which allows the Court to authorize commencement of a case without prepayment of the filing fee.
See Doc. 3, filed May 19, 2026. Plaintiff has paid the filing fee. See Doc. 4, filed May 19, 2026.
The undersigned has reviewed the Complaint pursuant to the Court's inherent power to manage its
docket. See Securities and Exchange Comm'n v. Management Solutions, Inc., 824 Fed.Appx. 550,
553 (10th Cir. 2020) ("a district court has the inherent power 'to manage [its] own affairs so as to
achieve the orderly and expeditious disposition of cases'”) (quoting Dietz v. Bouldin, 136 S. Ct.
1885, 1891-92 (2016)).
Case 1:26-cv-01610-KG-JMR Document 5 Filed 05/20/26 Page 1 of 4

2
Guide for Pro Se Litigants at 4, United States District Court, District of New Mexico (October
2022). The Local Rules, the Guide for Pro Se Litigants and a link to the Federal Rules of Civil
Procedure are available on the Court’s website: http://www.nmd.uscourts.gov.
Plaintiff has an obligation to prosecute this case. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b) (“If the plaintiff
fails to prosecute or to comply with these rules or a court order, a defendant may move to dismiss
the action”); Gustafson v. Luke, 696 Fed.Appx. 352, 354 (10th Cir. 2017) (“Although the language
of Rule 41(b) requires that the defendant file a motion to dismiss, the Rule has long been
interpreted to permit courts to dismiss actions sua sponte for a plaintiff's failure to prosecute or
comply with the rules of civil procedure or court's orders.”) (quoting Olsen v. Mapes, 333 F.3d
1199, 1204 n.3 (10th Cir. 2003)).
Plaintiff also has an obligation to serve Defendant. 	See Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(c)(1) (“The
plaintiff is responsible for having the summons and complaint served within the time allowed by
Rule 4(m) and must furnish the necessary copies to the person who makes service”).
Finally, the Court reminds Plaintiff of her obligations pursuant to Rule 11 of the Federal
Rules of Civil Procedure. See Yang v. Archuleta, 525 F.3d 925, 927 n. 1 (10th Cir. 2008) (“Pro se
status does not excuse the obligation of any litigant to comply with the fundamental requirements
of the Federal Rules of Civil and Appellate Procedure.”). Rule 11(b) provides:
Representations to the Court. By presenting to the court a pleading, written
motion, or other paper--whether by signing, filing, submitting, or later advocating
it--an attorney or unrepresented party certifies that to the best of the person's
knowledge, information, and belief, formed after an inquiry reasonable under the
circumstances:
(1) it is not being presented for any improper purpose, such as to harass, cause
unnecessary delay, or needlessly increase the cost of litigation;
(2) the claims, defenses, and other legal contentions are warranted by existing law
or by a nonfrivolous argument for extending, modifying, or reversing existing law
or for establishing new law;
Case 1:26-cv-01610-KG-JMR Document 5 Filed 05/20/26 Page 2 of 4

3
(3) the factual contentions have evidentiary support or, if specifically so identified,
will likely have evidentiary support after a reasonable opportunity for further
investigation or discovery; and
(4) the denials of factual contentions are warranted on the evidence or, if
specifically so identified, are reasonably based on belief or a lack of information.
Fed. R. Civ. P. 11(b). Failure to comply with the requirements of Rule 11 may subject Plaintiff to
sanctions, including monetary penalties and nonmonetary directives. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 11(c).
Order Regarding Representation of the Estate
Plaintiff, who is bringing this action as the personal representative of the Estate of Robert
Dennis Patten, is not an attorney authorized to practice before this Court. See D.N.M.LR-Civ. 83.7
("A corporation, partnership or business entity other than a natural person must be represented by
an attorney authorized to practice before this Court"). "A litigant may bring his own claims to
federal court without counsel, but not the claims of others." Fymbo v. State Farm Fire & Cas. Co.,
213 F.3d 1320, 1321 (10th Cir. 2000).
One purpose of the rule against pro se litigants representing another party is to protect the
interests of the represented party. 	Plaintiff may represent the Estate only if she is the sole
beneficiary of the estate and there are no creditors. See Rodgers v. Lancaster Police & Fire Dept.,
819 F.3d 205, 211 (5th Cir. 2016) ("A person with capacity under state law to represent an estate
in a survival action may proceed pro se if that person is the only beneficiary and the estate has no
creditors"); Bass v. Leatherwood, 788 F.3d 228, 230 (6th Cir. 2015) ("the sole beneficiary of an
estate without creditors may represent the estate pro se"); Guest v. Hansen, 603 F.3d 15, 21 (2d Cir.
2010) ("We hold that the administrator and sole beneficiary of an estate with no creditors may
appear pro se on behalf of the estate").
Case 1:26-cv-01610-KG-JMR Document 5 Filed 05/20/26 Page 3 of 4

4
Plaintiff Lisa Ann Patten shall, within 30 days of entry of this Order, either (i) have an
attorney authorized to practice in this Court enter his or her appearance on behalf of the Estate; or
(ii) conclusively demonstrate, with supporting documentation, that she is the sole beneficiary of
the Estate and there are no creditors. 	Failure to timely comply with this Order may result in
dismissal of this case.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
_____________________________________
KIRTAN KHALSA
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Case 1:26-cv-01610-KG-JMR Document 5 Filed 05/20/26 Page 4 of 4