Marsh v. Bank of Sierra, Inc. et al

Filing 7

ORDER DENYING #4 Request for Permission to File Electronically, signed by Magistrate Judge Sheila K. Oberto on 5/10/2022. (Hall, S)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

TERRANCE MARSH,
Plaintiff,

12
13
14
15
16

v.

Case No. 1:22-cv-00508-JLT-BAK (SKO)
ORDER DENYING REQUEST FOR
PERMISSION TO FILE
ELECTRONICALLY
(Doc. 4)

BANK OF SIERRA, INC., et al.,
Defendants.
_____________________________________/

17
18
19

Before the Court is Plaintiff Terrance Marsh’s Motion for Permission for Electronic Case

20 Filing (the “Motion”). (Doc. 4.) Local Rule 133(b)(2) provides that “[a]ny person appearing pro se
21 may not utilize electronic filing except with the permission of the assigned Judge or Magistrate
22 Judge.” Instead, “[a]ll pro se parties shall file and serve paper documents as required by applicable
23 Federal Rules of Civil . . . Procedure or by these [Local] Rules.” E.D. Cal. Local Rule 133(b)(2).
24 Nonetheless, a pro se party may “[request] to use paper or electronic filing as exceptions from these
25 Rules” if (1) they submit a stipulation between the parties “as provided in [Local Rule] 143;” or (2)
26 “if a stipulation cannot be had,” by a “written motion[] setting out an explanation of reasons for the
27 exception.” E.D. Cal. Local Rule 133(b)(3).
28

1

Here, the Motion is neither stipulated to by the defendants, nor does it set forth an

2 explanation of the reasons for the exception. The Court therefore finds that it is inappropriate in
3 this matter to depart from the Local Rule that “[a]ny person appearing pro se may not utilize
4 electronic filing.” E.D. Cal. Local Rule 133(b)(2). Accordingly, the Court DENIES the Motion
5 (Doc. 4), subject to renewal upon a showing of sufficient reason to justify deviating from Local Rule
6 133(b)(2).
7
8

IT IS SO ORDERED.

9
10

Dated:

/s/ Sheila K. Oberto

May 10, 2022

.

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2