McCoy v. Brown et al

Filing 16

ORDER DENYING 15 Request for Copies and Granting Second Request for Extension of Time, signed by Magistrate Judge Barbara A. McAuliffe on 9/25/18. Thirty Day Deadline. (Marrujo, C)

1
2
3
4
5

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

6

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

7
8

JOSEPH RAYMOND McCOY,

9

Plaintiff,

10

v.

11

BROWN, et al.,

12

Case No. 1:18-cv-00545-AWI-BAM (PC)
ORDER DENYING REQUEST FOR COPIES
AND GRANTING SECOND REQUEST FOR
EXTENSION OF TIME
(ECF No. 15)

Defendants.

THIRTY (30) DAY DEADLINE

13
14
15
16

Plaintiff Joseph Raymond McCoy (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se in this
civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
On July 20, 2018, the Court issued findings and recommendations recommending that

17

Plaintiff’s motion to proceed in forma pauperis be denied pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g) and

18

that Plaintiff be ordered to pay the $400.00 initial filing fee in full to proceed with this action.

19

(ECF No. 12.) Those findings and recommendations were served on Plaintiff and he was advised

20

that any objections were to be filed within fourteen (14) days. (Id.) Thereafter, the Court granted

21

in part Plaintiff’s motion for an extension of time, and the deadline was extended by thirty days.

22

(ECF Nos. 13, 14.)

23

Currently before the Court are Plaintiff’s Request for Official Court Records and Second

24

Request for Extension of Time, filed September 20, 2018. (ECF No. 15.) Plaintiff requests a

25

courtesy copy of findings and recommendations issued by Magistrate Judge Dennis L. Beck in

26

McCoy v. Kelso, Case No. 1:12-cv-00983-AWI-DLB, which was closed on September 1, 2015.

27

Those findings and recommendations recommended the denial of the defendants’ motion to

28

revoke Plaintiff’s in forma pauperis status in that action. Plaintiff argues that Judge Beck’s
1

1

findings and recommendations are material to this action and will provide the information

2

necessary to assist Plaintiff in drafting his objections to the pending findings and

3

recommendations in this action. Plaintiff further requests a thirty-day extension of time to file his

4

objections. (Id.)

5

Plaintiff is advised that the Clerk of the Court does not ordinarily provide free copies of

6

case documents to parties, and that Plaintiff is responsible for maintaining his own records for

7

this proceeding and other actions he has or will litigate. Further, even if Plaintiff were proceeding

8

in forma pauperis in this action, that status would not entitle him to free copies of documents

9

from the Court. E.g., Hullom v. Kent, 262 F.2d 862, 863 (6th Cir. 1959.) The Clerk charges

10

$0.50 per page for copies of documents. See 28 U.S.C. § 1914(b). Copies of up to twenty pages

11

may be made by the Clerk’s Office at this Court upon written request, prepayment of the copy

12

fees, and submission of a large, self-addressed stamped envelope.
To the extent Plaintiff believes that Judge Beck’s findings and recommendations are

13
14

material to this action, the Court finds it appropriate to take judicial notice of the existence of

15

Case No. 1:12-cv-00983 and the docket in that case.1
Having considered Plaintiff’s second request for an extension of time, the Court finds

16
17

good cause to grant the motion.
Accordingly, Plaintiff’s request for copies is DENIED, and his second request for an

18
19

extension of time to file objections to the pending findings and recommendations, (ECF No. 15),

20

is GRANTED. Plaintiff shall file his objections to the July 20, 2018 findings and

21

recommendations within thirty (30) days from the date of service of this order.

22
23

IT IS SO ORDERED.

24

Dated:

/s/ Barbara

September 25, 2018

A. McAuliffe

_

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

25
26
27
28

1

The Court may take judicial notice of court records. Fed. R. Evid. 201(b); United States v. Bernal-Obeso, 989 F.2d
331, 333 (9th Cir. 1993); Valerio v. Boise Cascade Corp., 80 F.R.D. 626 635 n.1 (N.D. Cal. 1978), aff’d, 645 F.2d
699 (9th Cir. 1981).

2