From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

King v. Calderwood

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEVADA
Feb 4, 2015
Case No. 2:13-cv-02080-GMN-PAL (D. Nev. Feb. 4, 2015)

Opinion

Case No. 2:13-cv-02080-GMN-PAL

02-04-2015

MATTHEW J. KING, Plaintiff, v. AMY CALDERWOOD, et al., Defendants.


ORDER (Mtn for Copies - Dkt. #35)

This matter is before the court on Plaintiff Matthew J. King's Motion to Extend Prison Copy Work (Dkt. #35). Plaintiff is a prisoner proceeding in this civil rights action pro se. The court has considered the Motion and Defendants' Opposition (Dkt. #38).

Plaintiff seeks an order extending his copy limit from $100.00 to $1000.00 to make unspecified copies in this action. Generally, an inmate has no constitutional right to free photocopying. See Johnson v. Moore, 948 F.2d 517, 521 (9th Cir. 1991). Additionally, courts in other jurisdictions have not permitted plaintiffs proceeding in forma pauperis to receive free copies of documents from the court without demonstrating a specific showing of need. See, e.g., Collins v. Goord, 438 F.Supp. 2d 399 (S.D.N.Y. 2006); Guinnv. Hoecker, 43 F.3d 1483 (10th Cir. 1994) (no right to free copy of any document in record unless plaintiff demonstrates specific need); In re Richard, 914 F.2d 1526 (6th Cir. 1990) (28 U.S.C. § 1915 does not give litigant right to have documents copied at government expense); Douglas v. Green, 327 F.2d 661, 662 (6th Cir. 1964) (no free copy of court orders).

Here, Plaintiff has not stated any specific reason that he needs additional copy work, nor has he specified any particular copies he needs. In addition, Plaintiff has not alleged that he cannot pay for the copies himself, nor has he provided any documents establishing he cannot. Therefore, Plaintiff's Motion will be denied without prejudice. If Plaintiff does have a specific need, he may file a renewed motion for the documents which states his specific need and provides a copy of Plaintiff's inmate balance sheet to demonstrate he cannot afford to pay for the copies.

Accordingly,

IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiff's Motion to Extend Prison Copy Work (Dkt. #35) is DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.

Dated this 4th day of February, 2015.

/s/_________

PEGGY A. LEEN

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE


Summaries of

King v. Calderwood

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEVADA
Feb 4, 2015
Case No. 2:13-cv-02080-GMN-PAL (D. Nev. Feb. 4, 2015)
Case details for

King v. Calderwood

Case Details

Full title:MATTHEW J. KING, Plaintiff, v. AMY CALDERWOOD, et al., Defendants.

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEVADA

Date published: Feb 4, 2015

Citations

Case No. 2:13-cv-02080-GMN-PAL (D. Nev. Feb. 4, 2015)