ORDER

PAUL G. BYRON, District Judge.

This cause is before the Court on Appellant's Motion to Vacate, filed October 3, 2018. (Doc. 16). On July 20, 2018, Appellant filed his Initial Brief. (Doc. 13). On August 17, 2018, Appellee filed its Response to Appellant's Initial Brief. (Doc. 14). Appellee attempted to serve the Response Brief on Appellant by email via Notice of Electronic Filing. (Doc. 14, p. 25). On September 6, 2018, the Court entered the Order of Dismissal affirming the bankruptcy court's order. (Doc. 15). Appellant now asks this Court to vacate its Order of Dismissal (Doc. 15), arguing that he was not properly served with Appellee's Response Brief. (Doc. 14). In the Motion to Vacate, Appellant also requests the Court strike from the record all briefs and hold an evidentiary hearing. (Doc. 16, p. 4). On October 9, 2018, Appellee filed its Response to Appellant's Motion to Vacate, stating it does not oppose vacating the order, but opposes Appellant's other requested forms of relief. (Doc. 18).

As a Pro Se Appellant, service may be made on Appellant by any of the following methods: (1) personal delivery; (2) mail; or (3) third-party commercial carrier for delivery within three days. Fed. R. Bankr. P. 8011. Electronic service is notably missing from these methods, which is the method Appellee used in its attempt to serve Appellant the Response Brief. (Doc. 14, p. 25). Therefore, the Court finds that Appellant has never been properly served Appellee's Response Brief.

Accordingly, it is ORDERED AND ADJUDGED as follows:

DONE AND ORDERED.