Vashisht-Rota v. Ottawa University

Filing 47

ORDER granting 46 Motion for Leave to Electronically File Documents. Signed by Judge Todd W. Robinson on 1/7/2021. (All non-registered users served via U.S. Mail Service)(jmr)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 12 APARNA VASHISHT-ROTA, an individual, 15 16 ORDER GRANTING MOTION FOR LEAVE TO ELECTRONICALLY FILE DOCUMENTS Plaintiff, 13 14 Case No.: 20-CV-959 TWR (KSC) v. OTTAWA UNIVERSITY, (ECF No. 46) Defendant. 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Presently before the Court is Plaintiff Aparna Vashisht-Rota’s Motion for Leave to Electronically File Documents (“Mot.,” ECF No. 46). “Except as prescribed by local rule, order, or other procedure, the Court has designated all cases to be assigned to the Electronic Filing System.” S.D. Cal. CivLR 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 California, Electronic Case Filing Administrative Policies and Procedures Manual, § 2(b) (Sept. 15, 2020). “A pro se party seeking leave to electronically file documents must file a motion and demonstrate the means to do so properly by stating their equipment and software capabilities in addition to agreeing to follow all rules and policies in the CM/ECF Administrative Policies and Procedures 1 20-CV-959 TWR (KSC) 1 Manual.” Id. The manual refers to the Court’s official web site for CM/ECF technical 2 specifications, id. at § 1(i), which include a “[c]omputer running Windows or Macintosh”; 3 “[s]oftware to convert documents from a word processor format to portable document 4 format (PDF),” such as “Adobe Acrobat 7.0 and higher”; “[i]nternet access supporting a 5 transfer rate of 56kb or higher”; a compatible browser, such as “Firefox 15, Internet 6 Explorer 9, and Safari 5.1/6 or later version”; a “[s]canner to image non-computerized 7 documents 400 pixels per inch (ppi)”; and a PACER account. United States District Court, 8 Southern 9 (last visited November 23, 2020). 10 Plaintiff’s declaration specifies that Plaintiff has access to all of the hardware and 11 software specified on the Court’s website. (See Motion at 2.) The Court therefore 12 GRANTS Plaintiff’s Motion for Leave to Electronically File Documents and ORDERS 13 Plaintiff to register as a user with the Clerk’s Office and as a subscriber per U.S. District 14 Court for the Southern District of California Electronic Case Filing Administrative Policies 15 and Procedures Manual Section 2(b). The Court reminds Plaintiff that electronic filing is 16 privilege and that any abuse of the CM/ECF system may result in termination of her 17 electronic filing privileges. 18 19 District of California, CM/ECF Information: General Information, IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: January 7, 2021 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2 20-CV-959 TWR (KSC)

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?