From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Gibson v. Bank of Am.

United States District Court, Middle District of Florida
Oct 21, 2024
2:24-cv-952-SPC-KCD (M.D. Fla. Oct. 21, 2024)

Opinion

2:24-cv-952-SPC-KCD

10-21-2024

RAYMOND GIBSON, Plaintiff, v. BANK OF AMERICA, N.A., Defendant.


ORDER

KYLE C. DUDEK, UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Plaintiff Raymond Gibson, proceeding without a lawyer, moves for access to the Court's electronic filing system. (Doc. 11.) The motion is DENIED. “Pro se litigants are generally denied access to electronic filing unless extenuating circumstances exist to justify waiving CM/ECF procedures.” Huminski v. Vermont, No. 2:13-cv-692-FtM-29, 2014 WL 169848, *4 (M.D. Fla. Jan. 15, 2014); see also McMahon v. Cleveland Clinic Found. Police Dep't, 455 Fed.Appx. 874, 878 (11th Cir. 2011) (affirming denial of CM/ECF access for pro se litigants). No extenuating circumstances have been shown (or even argued) here. To the extent Plaintiff believes electronic filing will help him access documents in the case, he can already submit documents electronically through the Web Portal on the Court's website at https://www.flmd. uscourts.gov/electronic-document-submission-web-portal. In short, the functionality Plaintiff seeks is already available through the Court's available resources.

ORDERED in Fort Myers, Florida on October 21, 2024.


Summaries of

Gibson v. Bank of Am.

United States District Court, Middle District of Florida
Oct 21, 2024
2:24-cv-952-SPC-KCD (M.D. Fla. Oct. 21, 2024)
Case details for

Gibson v. Bank of Am.

Case Details

Full title:RAYMOND GIBSON, Plaintiff, v. BANK OF AMERICA, N.A., Defendant.

Court:United States District Court, Middle District of Florida

Date published: Oct 21, 2024

Citations

2:24-cv-952-SPC-KCD (M.D. Fla. Oct. 21, 2024)