Reddy v. Precyse Solutions, LLC et al

Filing 110

ORDER re E-mails to Court signed by Magistrate Judge Stanley A. Boone on 6/2/2015. (Jessen, A)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

KRISHNA REDDY,

12
13
14
15

Plaintiff,

Case No. 1:12-cv-02061-AWI-SAB
ORDER RE E-MAILS TO COURT

v.
PRECYSE SOLUTIONS LLC, et al.,
Defendants.

16
17

Plaintiff is proceeding pro se in this action. In the course of this litigation, Plaintiff has

18

begun contacting the courtroom deputy by e-mail. Plaintiff has been advised that the courtroom

19

deputy does not accept documents for filing. See Decl. of Krishna Reddy ¶ 14, ECF No. 104. On

20

June 1, 2015, Plaintiff e-mailed the courtroom deputy requesting a hearing date be vacated

21

alleging improper notice.

22

The Court may not engage in exparte communication with the parties to an action.

23

Plaintiff can not make an exparte objection seeking a ruling without providing the opposing party

24

with notice. If Plaintiff seeks a ruling on a request from this Court she must properly file a

25

request through the Clerk’s Office. See Local Rule 133(d).

26

The Rules provide that since Plaintiff is proceeding pro se, she is required to file

27

documents by mail or in person with the Clerk’s Office. L.R. 133(b)(2). Further, the Rules

28

specifically state that documents are not accepted by the Clerk’s Office or chambers for filing by
1

1

fax, L.R. 133(e)(4). This would also apply to documents submitted by e-mail. While the

2

courtroom deputy has on occasion accepted e-mails from Plaintiff and a document by e-mail due

3

to time constraints, Plaintiff has abused the privileges despite admonishments. The Court shall

4

order Plaintiff not to contact the courtroom deputy.

5

Finally, as to Plaintiff’s current objection to the timing of the motion to compel, Plaintiff

6

is directed to Local Rule 251 which governs discovery motions. Rule 251 provides that “a

7

hearing of a motion pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 26 through 37 and 45 . . . may be had by the filing

8

and service of a notice of motion and motion scheduling the hearing date on the appropriate

9

calendar at least twenty-one (21) days from the date of filing and service.”

10

L.R. 251(a).

Defendants properly noticed the June 17, 2015 hearing.

11

Based on the foregoing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

12

1.

Plaintiff is not to e-mail documents to the courtroom deputy or contact the

13

courtroom deputy by e-mail with requests for action by the Court unless so authorized by the

14

Court; and

15

2.

Plaintiff shall personally appear at the June 17, 2015 hearing.

16
17
18

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

June 2, 2015
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2