Hucul v. The County of San Diego et al

Filing 4

ORDER Granting Plaintiff's Motion to File Electronically [Doc. No. 3 ]. Signed by Judge Cathy Ann Bencivengo on 8/01/2017. (All non-registered users served via U.S. Mail Service) (jjg)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

Case No.: 17cv1531-CAB-MDD

MICHAEL HUCUL,
Plaintiff,

12
13

v.

14

ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF'S
MOTION TO FILE
ELECTRONICALLY [Doc. No. 3]

The County of San Diego, the San Diego
County Department of Child Support
Services (DCSS) and it's director, Alisha
Griffin as an individual and in her official
capacity,

15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

Defendant.
Presently before the Court is Plaintiff Michael Hucul’s Motion for Leave to File
Electronically, Local Civil Rule 5.4, General Order 550, Federal Rules of Civil Procedure
Rules 5 and 83. [Doc. No. 3.] Having considered Plaintiff’s arguments and the law, the
Court GRANTS Plaintiff’s motion to file electronically.
Generally, “[e]xcept as prescribed by local rule, order, or other procedure, the
Court has designated all cases to be assigned to the Electronic Filing System.” Civ. L.R.
5.4(a). With respect to pro se litigants, however, “[u]nless otherwise authorized by the
court, all documents submitted for filing to the Clerk’s Office . . . must be in legible,
paper form.” Office of the Clerk, United States District Court for the Southern District of
1
17cv1531-CAB-MDD

1

California, Electronic Case Filing Administrative Policies and Procedures Manual § 2(b)

2

(2017).

3

A pro se party seeking leave to electronically file documents must file a motion

4

and demonstrate the means to do so properly by stating their equipment and software

5

capabilities in addition to agreeing to follow all rules and policies in the CM/ECF

6

Administrative Policies and Procedures Manual. Id. The manual refers to the court’s

7

official web site for CM/ECF technical specifications, id. at § 1(i), which include a

8

“computer running Windows or Macintosh”; “[s]oftware to convert documents from a

9

word processor format to [PDF], such as Adobe Acrobat PDF Writer; “Adobe Acrobat

10

7.0 and higher meet the CM/ECF filing requirements”; “PDF compatible word processor

11

like WordPerfect or Word”; “Internet access supporting a transfer rate of 56kb or

12

higher”; a compatible browser, such as Firefox 15.x, Internet Explorer 9.x, or Safari

13

5.1/6.x; and a “[s]canner to image non-computerized documents 400 pixels per inch

14

(ppi),” United States District Court, Southern District of California, CM/ECF: General

15

Info, https://www.casd.uscourts.gov/CMECF/SitePages/Home.aspx.

16
17

In the motion, Plaintiff states the following:

25

Plaintiff motions this Honorable District Court for leave to electronically file
documents. Plaintiff is using a Mac computer that is PDF compatible with
Adobe Acrobat 7.0 or higher and PDF Writer. Plaintiffs [sic] computer uses
a Safari browser that is compatible to Adobe Acrobat 7.0 or higher, is able to
convert to PDF and it's version of 10.1.2 (12603.3.8) exceeds the required
5.1/6x. to work correctly with CM/ECF version 6.1. Plaintiff uses "Pages",
which for Mac is similar to Wordperfect or Word and also converts to PDF.
Plaintiff has internet access with 56kb or higher and has a scanner to image
non-computerized documents at 400(ppi). Plaintiff agrees to follow all rules
and policies in the CM/ECF Ad1ninistrative Policies and Procedures
Manual, agrees to register as a user with the Clerk's Office and is a
subscriber to Pacer. (Drury v Barcelona (2016) U.S. District D. Nevada).
[Doc. No. 3 at 2.]

26

/////

27

/////

18
19
20
21
22
23
24

28
2
17cv1531-CAB-MDD

1

Because Plaintiff has provided sufficient information required by the CMECF

2

Administrative Policies and Procedures Manual, the Court GRANTS Plaintiff’s motion

3

for leave to file electronically. [Doc. No. 3.]

4
5

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: August 1, 2017

6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
3
17cv1531-CAB-MDD