Seifert v. Pritchard ( 2024 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 ALEXANDRA SEIFERT, Case No. 1:24-cv-01097-CDB 12 Plaintiff, ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO PROCEED IN FORMA 13 v. PAUPERIS 14 KENNETH GEORGE PRITCHARD, et al., (Doc. 2) 15 Defendants. ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR ELECTRONIC FILING 16 (Doc. 3) 17 18 19 Plaintiff Alexandra Seifert (“Plaintiff”), proceeding pro se, filed this civil action on 20 September 16, 2024. (Doc. 1). 21 Motion to Proceed In Forma Pauperis 22 Plaintiff has filed a motion to proceed in forma pauperis without prepaying fees or costs 23 pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915. (Doc. 2). The Court finds Plaintiff has made the showing required 24 by § 1915, and the request to proceed in forma pauperis shall be granted. 25 As to the status of the complaint, Plaintiff is advised that pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 26 1915(e)(2), the Court must conduct an initial review of pro se complaint where the plaintiff 27 proceeds in forma pauperis to determine whether it is legally sufficient under the applicable 28 pleading standards. The Court must dismiss a complaint, or portion thereof, if the Court 1 determines that the complaint is legally frivolous or malicious, fails to state a claim upon which 2 relief may be granted, or seeks monetary relief from a defendant who is immune from such relief. 3 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2). If the Court determines that the complaint fails to state a claim, leave to 4 amend may be granted to the extent that the deficiencies in the complaint can be cured by 5 amendment. 6 Plaintiff’s complaint will be screened in due course. If appropriate after the case has been 7 screened, the Clerk of the Court will provide Plaintiff with the requisite forms and instructions to 8 request the assistance of the United States Marshal in serving Defendants pursuant to Federal 9 Rule of Civil Procedure 4. 10 Motion for Electronic Filing 11 Also pending before the Court is Plaintiff’s motion for electronic filing. (Doc. 3). Under 12 the Court’s Local Rules, pro se parties are required to “file and serve paper documents” and 13 “may not utilize electronic filing except with the permission of the assigned Judge or Magistrate 14 Judge.” Local Rule 133(b)(2) (emphasis omitted). Any request for an exception to this rule 15 must be submitted as a stipulation between the parties or a “written motion setting out an 16 explanation of reasons for the exception.” Local Rule 133(b)(3). 17 It is within the Court’s discretion to grant or deny such a request. Reddy v. Precyse 18 Solutions LLC, No. 1:12-cv-02061-AWI-SAB, 2013 WL 2603413, at *3 (E.D. Cal. June 11, 19 2013). Here, Plaintiff’s filing contains no explanation or justification for access to the electronic 20 filing system. (Doc. 3). Upon review of the pleadings in this action and Plaintiff’s motion, the 21 Court finds that this action does not warrant an exception to the Local Rule. 22 23 [Remainder of this page intentionally left blank.] 24 25 26 27 28 1 | Conclusion and Order 2 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED as follows: 3 1. Plaintiff's motion to proceed in forma pauperis (Doc. 2), for good cause appearing, is 4 GRANTED and 5 2. Plaintiffs motion for electronic filing (Doc. 3) is DENIED. © | Ir IS SO ORDERED. Dated: _ September 27, 2024 | hwrnrD Pr 8 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28