(PC) Ruiz v. Gates ( 2022 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 ROGELIO MAY RUIZ, No. 2:19-CV-2518-DAD-DMC-P 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER 14 E. WELSH, 15 Defendant. 16 17 Plaintiff, a prisoner proceeding pro se, brings this civil rights action pursuant to 18 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Pending before the Court is Plaintiff’s motion, ECF No. 50, which has been 19 docketed as a motion for appointment of counsel/interpreter and for an extension of time. This 20 filing is hand-written in Spanish. 21 The Court cannot accept submissions in a language other than English. United 22 States v. Rivera-Rosario, 300 F.3d 1, 5 (1st Cir. 2002) (“It is clear, to the point of perfect 23 transparency, that federal court proceedings must be conducted in English.”). Sister courts in the 24 Eastern District have reached the same conclusion. Rodriguez v. Ruiz, No. 2:20-cv-1525-JPD P, 25 2020 WL 5995097, at *1 (E.D. Cal. Oct. 9, 2020). Courts sitting in other districts have also 26 recognized that submissions in federal court must be in English. Arteaga v. Cinram-Technicolor, 27 No. 3:19-cv-00349, 2020 WL 1905176, at *1 (M.D. Tenn. Apr. 17, 2020); Kim v. Chung Sook 28 Lee, No. 18-CV-12230 (CM), 2019 WL 4688692, at *2 (S.D. N.Y. Sept. 24, 2019); Ramirez- 1 | Solorio v. United States, No. 1:15-CV-3769-AT-JFK, 2017 WL 2350209, at *1 & n.1 (N.D. Ga. 2 || May 31, 2017). Moreover, in other cases filed by Plaintiff, courts in this district have rejected (or 3 || recognized that they are unable to consider) submissions that would require translation from a 4 | language other than English. Rodriguez, 2020 WL 5995097, at *1; see Ruiz v. Ehlers, No. 2:21- 5 || cv-00146-JAM-JDP (PC), 2021 WL 2313385, at *1 n.1 (E.D. Cal. May 5, 2021); Ruiz v. Mobert, 6 || No.: 1:17-cv-00709-BAM (PC), 2017 WL 6886093, *1 (E.D. Cal. July 5, 2017) (“As Plaintiff has 7 || been previously informed, the Court cannot provide Plaintiff with translated documents, nor will 8 | it translate his documents from Spanish into English.”). 9 The Court will sua sponte extend the time for Plaintiff to file objections to the 10 || Court’s September 6, 2022, findings and recommendations. Plaintiff may file objections within 11 | 30 days of the date of this order. Plaintiff's motion at ECF No. 50 is denied without prejudice to 12 || resubmission in English. 13 IT IS SO ORDERED. 14 | Dated: September 27, 2022 SS GC 15 DENNIS M. COTA 16 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28