Bacon v. Reyes

Filing 96

ORDER Denying 89 Plaintiff's Ex Parte Motion to Extend Prison Inmate Copy Work Limit without prejudice. Plaintiff may re-file his motion with notice to all parties. Signed by Magistrate Judge Cam Ferenbach on 06/27/2013. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - AC)

1
2

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

3

DISTRICT OF NEVADA

4

***

5
6

PERCY LAVAE BACON,

7

Plaintiff,

8

vs.

9

OSWALD REYES, et al.,

2:12-cv-01222-JCM-VCF
ORDER
[Ex Parte Motion to Extend Prison Inmate Copy
Work Limit (#89)]

Defendant.

10
11

Before the Court is Pro Se Plaintiff’s Ex Parte Motion to Extend Prison Inmate Copy Work

12

Limit filed on June 7, 2013. (#89). Plaintiff seeks to extend his prison copywork limit to $500.00. Id.

13

No opposition has been filed.

14

Discussion:

15

Under Local Rule 7-5(b), “[a]ll ex parte motions, applications or requests shall contain a

16

statement showing good cause why the matter was submitted to the Court without notice to all parties.”

17

In Plaintiff’s Motion to Extend Prison Inmate Copy Work Limit (#89), Plaintiff failed to demonstrate

18

good cause why his Motion should be deemed ex parte. LR 7-5(c) provides that motions “may be

19

submitted ex parte only for compelling reasons, and not for unopposed . . . motions.” Plaintiff has not

20

given any reason why he needs to file his Motion ex parte. Thus, he has not adequately met the need to

21

file his Motion ex parte.

22

Accordingly,

23

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Ex Parte Motion to Extend Prison Inmate Copy

24
25

Work Limit (#89) is DENIED without prejudice.

1
2

Plaintiff may re-file his motion with notice to all parties.
DATED this 27th day of June, 2013.
_________________________
CAM FERENBACH
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
2