Sanders #146274 v. Trinity Services Group Incorporated et al

Filing 134

ORDER that Plaintiff's Motion for Excerpts of Record (Doc. 133 ) is DENIED without prejudice. See the attached order for additional information. Signed by Senior Judge James A. Teilborg on 6/28/2021. (RMW)

1

WO

2
3
4
5
6

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

8
9

Michael Martin Sanders,
Plaintiff,

10
11

ORDER

v.

12

No. CV-18-01471-PHX-JAT (DMF)

Trinity Services Group Incorporated, et al.,

13

Defendants.

14
15

Before the Court is Plaintiff’s Motion for Excerpts of Record (Doc. 133). Plaintiff

16

is currently incarcerated, and pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a), the Court allowed Plaintiff

17

to proceed in forma pauperis. The Court granted summary judgment in favor of Defendants

18

on February 23, 2021 (Doc. 128), and the Clerk of Court entered judgment in favor of

19

Defendants and against Plaintiff (Doc. 129). Plaintiff then appealed from that judgment

20

(Doc. 130).

21

Plaintiff now requests “[p]ursuant to Ninth Circuit Rule 30-1.7” that the Court

22

provide “copies of the documents comprising the excerpts of record” in his case. (Doc. 133

23

at 1). Plaintiff’s motion does not specify what documents or portions of the record he

24

desires, nor does he indicate upon what grounds his appeal lies. (See id.).

25

Ninth Circuit rules do not require pro se appellants to submit excerpts of record, see

26

9th Cir. R. 30-1.3, and Plaintiff’s in forma pauperis status does not entitle Plaintiff to copies

27

of the record at government expense where not required by the appellate court, see 28

28

U.S.C. § 1915(c). Brown v. Bd. of Prison Terms, No. CIVS061581LKKCMKP, 2007 WL

1

628665, at *1 (E.D. Cal. Feb. 28, 2007). Further, while prisoners appealing without counsel

2

are entitled to a district court’s provision of excerpts of the record, see 9th Cir. R. 30-1.7,

3

excerpts of the record do not encompass the entire record in a case, see 9th Cir. R. 30-1.4.

4

Excerpts of the record include “all decisions being appealed, reviewed, or collaterally

5

challenged,” and “all other parts, but only those parts, of the record that are relevant to

6

deciding the appeal.” 9th Cir. R. 30-1.4(b)–(c).

7

Here, Plaintiff’s motion has given no indication of the grounds for his appeal or

8

what parts of the record he will need to support his appeal. (See Doc. 133). Upon examining

9

the record, Plaintiff states he is challenging “the orders of 10/7/20 [Doc. 107], 11/2/20

10

[Doc. 109], 1/26/21 [Doc. 124], 2/16/21 [Doc. 127] . . . and from the final judgment entered

11

in this action on 2/23/21 (Docs. 128, 129).” (Doc. 130). There is no indication in the record,

12

however, of what grounds Plaintiff is appealing upon or what other portions of the record

13

are relevant to Plaintiff’s appeal.

14

Thus, the Court will deny Plaintiff’s motion without prejudice so that Plaintiff may

15

file a motion that clearly states what orders he is challenging and what specific portions of

16

the record, along with Doc. numbers, are relevant to deciding the appeal. Plaintiff must

17

also state why the documents he requests are relevant to his appeal, as the excerpts of record

18

may only include relevant portions of the record. See 9th Cir. R. 30-1.4.

19

Accordingly,

20

IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Motion for Excerpts of Record (Doc. 133) is

21
22

DENIED without prejudice.
Dated this 28th day of June, 2021.

23
24
25
26
27
28

-2-