(PC) Torres v. Patel ( 2020 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 8 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 9 MIGUEL TORRES., ) Case No.: 1:18-cv-00188-LJO-SAB (PC) 10 ) Plaintiff, ) 11 ) ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO v. ) COMPEL 12 ) ISMAIL PATEL, et.al., [ECF No. 47] 13 ) Defendants. ) ) 14 ) 15 ) 16 17 Plaintiff Miguel Torres is appearing pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action 18 pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. 19 Currently before the Court is Plaintiff’s motion to compel, filed on April 23, 2020. (ECF No. 20 23.) Plaintiff seeks to compel Defendants to provide him a free copy of his deposition transcript. 21 Plaintiff’s motion must be denied. 22 Defendants are not required to provide Plaintiff with a copy of his deposition transcript. See 23 Boston v. Garcia, No. 2:10-cv-1782 KJM DAD P, 2013 WL 1165062, at *2 (E.D. Cal. Mar. 20, 2013) 24 (denying plaintiff’s request that the court order defendants to provide him with a copy of his 25 deposition transcript). Moreover, Plaintiff cannot obtain a copy of his deposition transcript free of 26 charge through a request for production. See Joseph v. Parciasepe, No. 2:14-cv-0414 GEB ACP, 2016 27 WL 2743448, at *4 (E.D. May, 11, 2016) (denying motion to compel production of a free copy of a 28 deposition transcript). Furthermore, although Plaintiff is proceeding in forma pauperis, “ ‘the WAS 4.10 ° UV LOOUINYINE SGN MVEUPTTOTI Sto PIR eee OY eve 1 || expenditure of public funds [on behalf of an indigent litigant] is proper only when authorized by 2 || Congress.’ ” Tedder v. Odel, 890 F.2d 210, 211 (9th Cir. 1989) (quoting United States v. MacCollom 3 |]426 U.S. 317, 321 (1976). The expenditure of public funds for deposition transcripts is not authorizec 4 || by the in forma pauperis statute or any other statute. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915. Pursuant to Federal Rule 5 || of Civil Procedure 30, a party may obtain a copy of the deposition transcript upon reasonable paymer 6 ||of fees from the officer before whom the deposition was taken—a court reporter or deposition office 7 || See Fed. R. Civ. P. 30(f)(3); Clairborne v. Battery, No. CIV S-06-2919 FCD EFB, 2009 WL 530352, 8 || at *3 (E.D. Cal. Mar. 3, 2009) (denying plaintiff's request for a court order directing the defendant to 9 || provide him with a copy of his deposition transcript); Brown v. Castillo, No. CV F-02-6018 AWI 10 || DLB, 2006 WL 1408452, at *1 (E.D. Cal. May 22, 2006) (same). Accordingly, Plaintiff's motion to 11 || compel Defendants to provide him a free copy of the deposition transcript is DENIED. 12 13 || IT IS SO ORDERED. 1 (ee 14 || Dated: _ June 26, 2020 OF 15 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28