Lim v. Child Protective Services of Tulare County ( 2021 )

1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 6 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 7 8 CHONG SOOK LIM, Case No. 1:20-cv-01049-NONE-SKO 9 Plaintiff, 10 v. ORDER DENYING REQUEST FOR KOREAN INTERPRETER 11 JENNIFER MENNE and MELANIE HUERTA, (Doc. 20) 12 Defendants. 13 / 14 Plaintiff Chong Sook Lim is proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights 15 action brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (“Section 1983”). On May 25, 2021, Plaintiff filed a 16 request for the Court to provide a Korean language interpreter for the scheduling conference on June 17 17, 2021, and for “all other conferences and trials for this case in the future.” (Doc. 20.) 18 In criminal proceedings or in civil cases initiated by the United States, the Court must 19 provide an interpreter for a non-English-speaking party. 28 U.S.C. § 1827(j). However, the present 20 action is not a criminal prosecution, nor is it a civil lawsuit initiated by the United States of America. 21 Rather, it is a civil action initiated by Plaintiff herself. Therefore, there is no statutory obligation to 22 provide Plaintiff with an interpreter. See Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Beauty 23 Enterprises, Inc., 2002 WL 1626163 at *3(D. Conn. May 21, 2002)(“Court Interpreters Act applies 24 to civil proceedings initiated by the United States.”). Accordingly, Plaintiff’s request is DENIED. 25 Should Plaintiff wish to have an interpreter present at the upcoming scheduling conference 26 (or any other court proceeding), she must make those arrangements. Information regarding locating 27 a qualified interpreter can be found here: 28 1 http://www.caed.uscourts.gov/caednew/index.cfm/attorney-info/attorney-resources/court- 2 interpreters/ (“Find an Interpreter”). 3 IT IS SO ORDERED. 4 Sheila K. Oberto 5 Dated: June 1, 2021 /s/ . UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28