entry of dismissal orders if debtors do not file the information required by § 521(a)(1) within 45 days of the petition date. These procedures are reasonable in general, and comport with Congressional intent. Given the serious nature of “automatic dismissal,” however, it should not be done unless the § 521(i) mandate is clear. In this case, automatic dismissal was not required because § 521(a)(1) did not obligate Debtor to file a CMI Statement. The Dismissal Order was entered in error, the mistake will be corrected, and the Court’s policies changed accordingly. A separate order will be entered. 1 . These facts are taken from the case docket, of which the Court took judicial notice. See St. Louis Baptist Temple, Inc. v. Fed. Deposit Ins. Corp., 605 F.2d 1169, 1172 (10th Cir.1979) (<HOLDING>); LeBlanc v. Salem (In re Mailman Steam Carpet
recognizing that a district court may sua sponte dismiss a complaint for failure to serve after notice to the plaintiff recognizing that the court may take judicial notice of its own docket holding that a court may sua sponte take judicial notice of its docket recognizing that a court may rely on matters of which a court may take judicial notice recognizing a district judge may dismiss a case sua sponte under either rule 41b or its inherent authority to manage its docket