Opinion
CR-02-00081-001-PCT-JAT
04-06-2022
United States of America, Plaintiff, v. Elvira Charley, Defendant.
ORDER
James A. Teilborg Senior United States District Judge
Defendant has submitted a request for a copy of the docket sheet. The undersigned has been informed that Defendant has twice previously made this request to the Clerk's office. On both occasions, the Clerk's office sent her a bill to pay for her request, but she has never paid. Thus, the Clerk's office filed this most recent request into the record for this Court's consideration. (Doc. 413).
In her request, Defendant does not ask that the fee be waived. Additionally, she has not remitted payment consistent with the prior two billings. Further, even if the Court were to assume Defendant were asking for the fee to be waived, on the record, such a request would be denied.
Defendant has not been granted in forma pauperis status. Thus, Defendant is not subject to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 1915. However, even if she were, “The Supreme Court has declared that ‘the expenditure of public funds [on behalf of an indigent litigant] is proper only when authorized by Congress ....'” Tedder v. Odel, 890 F.2d 210, 211-12 (9th Cir. 1989) (quoting United States v. MacCollom, 426 U.S. 317, 321 (1976)); see also In re Richard, 914 F.2d 1526, 1527 (6th Cir. 1990) (concluding that 28 U.S.C. § 1915, “does not give the litigant a right to have documents copied and returned to him at government expense”). Finally, aside from the specific costs waived pursuant to section 1915, no other statute authorizes the federal courts to commit federal monies for payment of the necessary expenses in a civil suit brought by an indigent litigant. See Moss v. ITT Cont'l Baking Co., 83 F.R.D. 624 (E.D. Va.1979) (finding there is no implicit federal fund for the payment of expenses in the context of appointed counsel).
Thus, because this case was closed and judgment entered in 2010 (Doc. 371), the Motion to Vacate, Set Aside or Correct Sentence (CV-12-8032) was decided in 2012 (Doc. 404), and because nothing is currently pending before this Court or the Court of Appeals, there is no basis to provide Defendant with copies free of charge. Thus, for all of the foregoing reasons, IT IS ORDERED that the request for a copy of the docket sheet (Doc. 413) is denied.