17 of 18 responses disappeared

I responded to the Complaint within the required 21 day time period with 18 responses.
http://www.chiefjudgesmith.com/18responses/all-18responses714p.pdf

I verified that I sent 18 responses to the Court in three ways: (1) by USPS, (2) by email, and (3) by letter. Seventeen (17) of my eighteen (18) responses did disappear after being received by the Court on September 25, 2012, at 10:44 AM. Stephanie Walker signed for them. They weighed 6 lbs and 1 oz and the USPS delivery cost was $62.85.

(below) This is the front page of my one (1) response recognized as being received by the Court on 9/24/2012 at 10:01 AM. Rodney Bass signed for it. It weighed 12 ounces and cost $18.95. USPS EI637303496




(below) The following pages are the front pages of my seventeen (17) responses that disappeared after being received by the Court on 9/25/2012 at 10:44 AM. Stephanie Walker signed for it. It weighed 6 lbs and 1 oz and cost $62.85.  USPS EI480187651US

1  This disappeared after being received by the Court

2 This disappeared after being received by the Court

3 This disappeared after being received by the Court

4 This disappeared after being received by the Court

5 This disappeared after being received by the Court

6 This disappeared after being received by the Court

7 This disappeared after being received by the Court

8 This disappeared after being received by the Court

9 This disappeared after being received by the Court

10 This disappeared after being received by the Court

11 This disappeared after being received by the Court

12 This disappeared after being received by the Court

13 This disappeared after being received by the Court

14 This disappeared after being received by the Court

15 This disappeared after being received by the Court

16 This disappeared after being received by the Court

17 This disappeared after being received by the Court

But Chief Judge Dennis J. Smith's Order dated January 25, 2013, says this:

"1. The material facts set forth in the Complaint filed by Plaintiff in this action are deemed to be admitted by Defendant Anthony M. O'Connell pursuant to Va. Sup. Ct. Rule 1:4(e);- based on the failure of Defendant Anthony M. O'Connell to deny such facts in the responsive pleading filed by him, entitled "Response to Summons Served on September 8, 2012." . . .
3. Because there are no material facts in dispute in this action
and the facts alleged in the Complaint support the relief requested therein, summary judgment pursuant to Va. Sup. Ct. Rule. 3:20 on all counts alleged in Plaintiff's Complaint is appropriate."