Xie v. Turner Designs Hydro Carbon Instruments, Inc. et al

Filing 40

ORDER DENYING requests for permission to use electronic filing system. The Court DENIES the Request, (Docs. 28 & 37), and the Motion (Doc. 33). Order signed by Magistrate Judge Sheila K. Oberto on 8/3/2017. (Timken, A)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Case No. 1:17-cv-00284-LJO-SKO AGNES XIE, Plaintiff, v. ORDER DENYING REQUESTS FOR PERMISSION TO USE ELECTRONIC FILING SYSTEM (Doc. 28) TURNER DESIGNS HYDRO CARBON INSTRUMENTS, INC., et al., Defendants. _____________________________________/ 16 17 Before the Court are (1) the parties’ Stipulation (the “Request”), in which the parties 18 “stipulate and agree [to] allow Plaintiff” to utilize the “ECF filing” system, (Docs. 28 & 37), and 19 (2) Plaintiff’s Motion for Permission for Electronic Case Filing (the “Motion”), (Doc. 33). 20 Local Rule 133(b)(2) provides that “[a]ny person appearing pro se may not utilize 21 electronic filing except with the permission of the assigned Judge or Magistrate Judge.” Instead, 22 “[a]ll parties shall file and serve paper documents as required by applicable Federal Rules of Civil 23 . . . Procedure or by these [Local] Rules.” E.D. Cal. Local Rule 133(b)(2). Nonetheless, a pro se 24 party may “[r]equest to use paper or electronic filing as exceptions from these Rules” if (1) they 25 submit a stipulation between the parties “as provided in [Local Rule] 143;” or (2) “if a stipulation 26 cannot be had,” by a “written motion[] setting out an explanation of reasons for the exception.” 27 E.D. Cal. Local Rule 133(b)(3). 28 In this case, the parties filed a stipulation indicating that they agree to Plaintiff’s use of the 1 2 electronic filing system and Plaintiff filed the Motion requesting use of this system. (See Docs. 3 28, 33, 37.) However, the Court finds that it is inappropriate in this matter to deviate from the 4 Local Rule that “[a]ny person appearing pro se may not utilize electronic filing.” E.D. Cal. Local 5 Rule 133(b)(2). 6 Accordingly, the Court DENIES the Request, (Docs. 28 & 37), and the Motion (Doc. 33). 7 8 IT IS SO ORDERED. 9 Dated: 10 August 3, 2017 /s/ Sheila K. Oberto UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2 .

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?