David E. Bettini v. Mirabella, Kincaid, Frederick & Mirabella LLC, et al.

District Court, D. Arizona·Decided January 5, 2026·No. 2:25-cv-04876·Unknown

Opinion

WO

David E Bettini, No. CV-25-04876-PHX-KML

Plaintiff, ORDER

v.

Mirabella, Kincaid, Frederick & Mirabella LLC, et al., Defendants. Plaintiff David E. Bettini filed a complaint and two motions. Bettini’s first motion requests permission to file documents electronically. (Doc. 3.) That request is granted. His second motion requests the court grant “reasonable accommodations under the Americans with Disabilities Act.” (Doc. 4.) Bettini argues that under the ADA “[c]ourts are required to provide reasonable modifications to policies, practices, or procedures when necessary to avoid discrimination.” (Doc. 4 at 2.) Bettini then identifies the accommodations he believes necessary, such as the need for remote appearances. (Doc. 4 at 2.) The ADA “requires state courts to make disability accommodations,” but “does not apply to federal courts.” Roman v. Jefferson at Hollywood LP, 495 F. App’x 804, 806 (9th Cir. 2012). Despite the ADA not applying, “it has long been the policy of the Judicial Conference of the United States to attempt to accommodate individuals with disabilities in court proceedings.” Mapes v. Hatcher Real Est., No. 119CV02162JRSMJD, 2021 WL 5404626, at *5 (S.D. Ind. Feb. 4, 2021). Therefore, in appropriate circumstances accommodations are provided to litigants. Bettini’s current request, however, is premature. All of the accommodations Bettini seeks relate to in-court proceedings. (Doc. 4 at 2-3.) No in-court proceedings are scheduled. If such proceedings are scheduled, Bettini may raise his need for accommodations at that time. IT IS ORDERED the Motion for Electronic Filing (Doc. 3) is GRANTED. Plaintiff shall comply with all rules outlined in the District of Arizona’s Case Management/Electronic Case Filing Administrative Policies and Procedures Manual, register as a subscriber to PACER (Public Access to Electronic Records) within five days of the date of this Order, and comply with the privacy policy of the Judicial Conference of the United States and E-Government Act of 2002. Any misuse of the ECF system will result in immediate discontinuation of this privilege and disabling of the password assigned to the party. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED the Motion for Accommodations (Doc. 4) is IT IS FURTHER ORDERED as follows: Governing Rules Both counsel and pro se litigants must abide by the Rules of Practice of the U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona (“Local Rules”) and the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Disclosure Statements Full compliance with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 7.1 is required by plaintiff(s) and defendant(s). Rule 7.1(a)(1) requires any nongovernmental corporation to file a disclosure statement identifying “any parent corporation and any publicly held corporation owning 10% or more of its stock.” Rule 7.1(a)(2) requires a party in an action where jurisdiction is based on diversity under 28 U.S.C. § 1332(a) to file a disclosure statement identifying the citizenship of “every individual or entity whose citizenship is attributed to that party.” A Corporate Disclosure Statement form is available at https://www.azd.uscourts.gov/forms/disclosure-statement. Service Deadline Service of the summons and complaint on each defendant located in the United States must occur within 90 days of filing the complaint. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(m). If service cannot occur within 90 days, a request for an extension may be filed before expiration of the 90-day period. Any such request must set forth the reason why service has not been accomplished and request a specific short additional period of time. If the court believes your reason constitutes “good cause,” it will authorize a brief additional period to accomplish service. Proof of service must be filed with the Clerk of Court, in the form of an affidavit, promptly after service has been made. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(l). It is important to comply with this requirement because absent proof of service, the court will have no way of knowing that the complaint has been served. This order serves as an express warning that the court will dismiss this action, without further notice to plaintiff(s), with respect to any defendant that is not timely served. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(m). Forms of Papers The parties shall adhere to all of the requirements of Local Rule 7.1, including the requirement that text and footnotes shall be no smaller than 13 point. Citations supporting any textual proposition shall be included in the text, not in a footnote. Notices of supplemental authority and responses to those notices are limited to 350 words excluding case captions and signature blocks. Paper Courtesy Copies Do not send paper courtesy copies of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 7(a) pleadings, short procedural motions (e.g., motions for extension of time), 26(f) reports, or stipulations. A paper courtesy copy of dispositive motions (or other lengthy motions that will be opposed) and any responses or replies thereto shall be either postmarked and mailed to the judge or hand-delivered to the judge’s mailbox in the courthouse by the next business day after the electronic filing. Do not attempt to deliver documents to the judge’s chambers. Courtesy copies should be double-sided and include the ECF-generated header at the top of each page. Courtesy copies of documents too large for stapling must be submitted in three-ring binders. Amending Pleadings Before filing a motion for leave to amend a pleading, the party that wishes to amend must seek the consent of the other parties in an attempt to file the amended pleading pursuant to Local Rule 15.1(b). If any party is unwilling to consent, the motion for leave to amend must indicate which party (or parties) will oppose the request. If a motion for leave to amend a pleading fails to so indicate, the motion will be denied without prejudice for failure to adhere to this order. Motions and Stipulations Every motion or stipulation, however mundane, must cite the rule(s) and/or law(s) that permit the court to grant the requested relief. Requests for extensions of time must include a brief explanation of why the extension is needed to help the court determine whether there is good cause. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(b)(1)(A). To ensure timely case processing, a party moving for an extension of time, enlargement of page limitations, or leave to file a document under seal shall indicate in the motion whether the non-movant opposes the request and intends to file a written response. If such a motion does not so indicate, it may be denied for failure to comply with this order. Motions and stipulations should be accompanied by proposed orders. A proposed order is not necessary for motions that will require a reasoned analysis from the court, or for stipulations requesting issuance of the court’s standard protective order with no amendments. These proposed orders must not be on letterhead or contain any information identifying the party submitting the order, and they must set forth the relief requested rather than incorporating the motion or stipulation by reference. See also Local Rule 7.1(b)(3). Proposed orders must be emailed—in Microsoft Word format (not PDF)—to Lanham_Chambers@azd.uscourts.gov. T

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

David E. Bettini v. Mirabella, Kincaid, Frederick & Mirabella LLC, et al., (D. Ariz. 2026).

David E. Bettini v. Mirabella, Kincaid, Frederick & Mirabella LLC, et al. (David E. Bettini v. Mirabella, Kincaid, Frederick & Mirabella LLC, et al.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Gabriel Roman v. Jefferson at Hollywood Lp
495 F. App'x 804 (Ninth Circuit, 2012)
Center for Auto Safety v. Chrysler Group, LLC
809 F.3d 1092 (Ninth Circuit, 2016)