Opinion
7:22-CV-00112 (WLS)
09-13-2023
LARRY THOMAS Plaintiff, v. GOVERNOR'S OFFICE FOR THE STATE OF GEORGIA, et al, Defendants.
ORDER
W. LOUIS SANDS, SR. JUDGE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
Before the Court is pro se Plaintiff Thomas's Motion for Permission to Access CM/ECF (Doc. 78). Therein, Plaintiff seeks access to the Case Management and Electronic Case Files system so that he can file documents “faster” and “respond in less time.” (Id.)
Local Rule 5 of this Court provides that pro se parties “are not authorized to file electronically without permission from the court.” M.D. L.R. 5.A. An unrepresented individual's request to obtain the Court's permission to file his submissions electronically via the CM/ECF system are typically denied, unless the pro se party makes a showing of good cause or extenuating circumstances justifying such relief. See McMahon v. Cleveland Clinic Found Police Dep't, 455 Fed.Appx. 874, 878 (11th Cir. 2011). The Eleventh Circuit gives “great deference to a district court's interpretation of its local rules” and reviews “a district court's application of its local rules for an abuse of discretion.” Id.
Here, Plaintiff Thomas does not show good cause, which would warrant permitting him to file electronically. The record shows that Plaintiff is a frequent filer and seems to have no trouble drafting and sending his motions to the Clerk. The Clerk also seems to file his documents promptly and diligently as she receives them. Moreover, Plaintiff has previously been warned by the Court regarding his behaviors toward the Clerk and for making false, malicious, unsupported, and baseless allegations as to the Undersigned. (Docs. 27; 36). Thus, the Court finds that granting Plaintiff permission to file electronically will only further Plaintiff s ability to abuse the electronic filing system. Therefore, Plaintiff s Motion for Permission to Access CM/ECF (Doc. 78) is DENIED.
SO ORDERED.