Thompson v. Howard et al

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF KANSAS
RICHARD BRIAN THOMPSON, 	)
)
Plaintiff, 	) 	CIVIL ACTION
)
v. 	) 	No. 25-2497-KHV
)
LAURA HOWARD, in her official and individual 	)
capacity as Secretary of the Kansas Department 	)
for Children and Families, et al., 	)
)
Defendants. 	)
____________________________________________)
ORDER
On November 19, 2025, the Court struck Plaintiff’s Combined Motion For Summary
Judgment And For Dismissal Of Defendants’ Motion To Dismiss As Procedurally Barred, Based
On The Established Record Of Forfeiture And Admission By Failure To Deny (Doc. #30, re-filed
as Doc. #31) filed November 9, 2025 and Plaintiff’s Consolidated Response In Opposition To
Defendant Harshbarger’s Motion To Dismiss And Motion For Summary Judgment And For
Dismissal Of Defendants’ Motion To Dismiss As Procedurally Barred Under Federal Supremacy,
Waiver, Forfeiture And Admission By Silence (Doc. #33, re-filed as Doc. #34) filed November 17,
2025. See Memorandum And Order (Doc. #35); Order (Doc. #36). The Court also ordered that
on or before December 5, 2025, plaintiff shall respond to the Motion To Dismiss Plaintiff’s
Complaint Filed By Defendants Laura Howard, Secretary For The Kansas Department For
Children And Families, Kelly Milner, Jessica Kline, Julie Homolka, Angela Helmuth, And Nicolas
Kennedy, In Their Official And Individual Capacities As Employees Of KDCF And Memorandum
In Support Of Same (Doc. #25) and Defendant Jenni Harshbarger, Ph.D.’s Motion To Dismiss
Plaintiff’s Complaint For Failure To State A Claim (Doc. #26). This matter is before the Court on
Case 2:25-cv-02497-KHV-ADM Document 39 Filed 11/20/25 Page 1 of 4

-2-
plaintiff’s Motion For Clarification, For Reasonable ADA Accommodation And For Temporary
Suspension Of The December 5, 2025 Deadline (Doc. #38) filed November 19, 2025. For reasons
stated below, the Court sustains plaintiff’s motion in part.
Plaintiff first seeks clarification why the Court struck his filings so that he can determine
how to submit corrected filings. 	As the Court explained in the Memorandum And Order (Doc.
#35) which struck Plaintiff’s Combined Motion (Doc. #30, re-filed as Doc. #31), “[p]laintiff’s
brief does not comply with the District of Kansas rules as follows: (1) it is not double-spaced (see
D. Kan. Rule 5.1(a)), (2) it exceeds the 40-page limit for summary judgment motions and the
15-page limit for responses to motions to dismiss (see D. Kan. Rule 7.1(d)(2)–(3)), and (3) it does
not begin with a section that contains a concise and numbered statement of material facts as to
which the movant contends no genuine issue exists and which refers with particularity to those
portions of the record upon which movant relies (see D. Kan. Rule 56.1(a)).” Memorandum And
Order (Doc. #35) at 2. For these same reasons, the Court struck Plaintiff’s Consolidated Response
(Doc. #33, re-filed as Doc. #34) filed November 17, 2025. 	Order (Doc. #36) at 1 (striking
Plaintiff’s Consolidated Response (Doc. #33, re-filed as Doc. #34), for substantially reasons stated
in Memorandum And Order (Doc. #35)).1
Plaintiff asks for “reasonable accommodations under Title II of the ADA and Section 504
1 	The Court also noted that plaintiff improperly incorporated voluminous materials
by reference and did not include pinpoint citations for more than 100 case citations. 	See
Memorandum And Order (Doc. #35) at 2–3. The Court did not strike plaintiff’s filings for these
reasons. Plaintiff can attach and refer to exhibits which provide support for his argument, but he
cannot “incorporate” the exhibits in their entirety as additional argument unless the incorporated
material does not exceed the page limit when added to the other material in the brief. See id. at 4
(for future filings, “[u]nless a party incorporates limited material which does not exceed the page
limit when added to the other material in the brief, the Court will disregard materials which a party
attempts to incorporate by reference”).
Case 2:25-cv-02497-KHV-ADM Document 39 Filed 11/20/25 Page 2 of 4

-3-
of the Rehabilitation Act to allow meaningful access to the Court’s procedural requirements.”
Motion For Clarification (Doc. #38) at 1. At this stage, the Court construes plaintiff’s request as
supplemental argument in support of Plaintiff’s Renewed Motion For Appointment Of Counsel
Under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(1) (Doc. #32) filed November 16, 2025, which is pending before
Magistrate Judge Angel D. Mitchell.
Finally, plaintiff asks for an extension of time to file responses to defendants’ motions to
dismiss until after the Court rules on his motion to clarify. Because part of plaintiff’s motion to
clarify relates to his pending motion for appointment of counsel, the Court suspends the deadline
for plaintiff to respond to defendants’ motions to dismiss. 	If Judge Mitchell denies plaintiff’s
motion for appointment of counsel, plaintiff shall file a response to defendants’ motions to dismiss
within 15 days after her ruling. 	If Judge Mitchell grants plaintiff’s motion for appointment of
counsel, she will set a deadline for counsel to respond to defendants’ motions to dismiss.
IT 	IS 	THEREFORE 	ORDERED 	that 	plaintiff’s 	Motion 	For 	Clarification, 	For
Reasonable ADA Accommodation And For Temporary Suspension Of The December 5, 2025
Deadline (Doc. #38) filed November 19, 2025 is SUSTAINED in part. 	Within 15 days of
Magistrate 	Judge 	Angel 	D. 	Mitchell’s 	ruling 	on 	Plaintiff’s 	Renewed 	Motion 	For
Appointment Of Counsel Under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(1) (Doc. #32) filed November 16, 2025,
plaintiff shall respond to the Motion To Dismiss Plaintiff’s Complaint Filed By Defendants
Laura Howard, Secretary For The Kansas Department For Children And Families, Kelly
Milner, Jessica Kline, Julie Homolka, Angela Helmuth, And Nicolas Kennedy, In Their
Official And Individual Capacities As Employees Of KDCF And Memorandum In Support
Of Same (Doc. #25) and Defendant Jenni Harshbarger, Ph.D.’s Motion To Dismiss Plaintiff’s
Complaint For Failure To State A Claim (Doc. #26).
Case 2:25-cv-02497-KHV-ADM Document 39 Filed 11/20/25 Page 3 of 4

-4-
Dated this 20th day of November, 2025 at Kansas City, Kansas.
s/ Kathryn H. Vratil
KATHRYN H. VRATIL
United States District Judge
Case 2:25-cv-02497-KHV-ADM Document 39 Filed 11/20/25 Page 4 of 4