Schneider v. Bank of America N.A et al

Filing 110

ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Edmund F. Brennan on 9/12/2012 ORDERING that Plaintiff's 109 request for leave to file electronically in this action is GRANTED. The Clerk of Court shall contact plaintiff in order to facilitate his participation in the CM/ECF system. (Zignago, K.)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10

CHRISTOPHER D. SCHNEIDER,
Plaintiff,

11
12

No. 2:11-cv-2953-LKK-EFB PS

vs.

13

BANK OF AMERICA, N.A., et al.,

14

Defendants.
_________________________________/

ORDER

15
16

This action, in which plaintiff is pro se, was referred to the undersigned under Eastern

17

District of California Local Rule 302(c)(21). On September 10, 2012, plaintiff filed an

18

application for an order granting him permission to file documents in this case electronically.

19

Dckt. No. 109. The Local Rules provide that “[a]ny person appearing pro se may not utilize

20

electronic filing except with the permission of the assigned Judge or Magistrate Judge.” E.D.

21

Cal. L.R. 133(b)(2). “Requests to use paper or electronic filing as exceptions from these Rules

22

shall be submitted as stipulations as provided in L.R. 143 or, if a stipulation cannot be had, as

23

written motions setting out an explanation of reasons for the exception. Points and authorities

24

are not required, and no argument or hearing will normally be held.” E.D. Cal. L.R. 133(b)(3).

25
26

Plaintiff states in his application for leave to file electronically that (1) he has been
prejudiced by the “delay” in his paper filed documents getting scanned into the system, and by
1

1

not being able to access the [electronic case filing] system,” and (2) he has to expend significant

2

time and money to drive to Sacramento from his residence in Sutter Creek, California in order to

3

file documents in person. Dckt. No. 109 at 2-3. Plaintiff also contends that permitting plaintiff

4

to file documents electronically will save plaintiff and the court time and will prevent a waste of

5

resources. Id. at 3. Plaintiff further indicates that he attempted to obtain a stipulation from

6

defense counsel to no avail. Id. at 1-2.

7

In light of plaintiff’s representations, his request for leave to file electronically will be

8

granted. The Clerk of Court will contact plaintiff in order to facilitate his participation in the

9

court’s electronic filing and case management system (“CM/ECF”) system.1

10

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

11

1. Plaintiff’s request for leave to file electronically in this action, Dckt. No. 109, is

12
13
14

granted.2
2. The Clerk of Court shall contact plaintiff in order to facilitate his participation in the
CM/ECF system.

15

SO ORDERED.

16

DATED: September 12, 2012.

17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24

1

However, plaintiff is admonished that an abuse of the CM/ECF system will result in a
revocation of the authorization for plaintiff to file electronically.

25
2

26

Because plaintiff has not consented to electronic service, the parties shall continue to
serve documents conventionally in accordance with Local Rules 135(b) and (e).
2