Kevin Fernandez Vs. State of Nevada, et al.

Filing 642

ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART 630 Motion to increase copywork limit : $25.00 increase granted. Signed by Magistrate Judge William G. Cobb on 4/30/2012. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - DRM)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEVADA KEVIN LYNN FERNANDEZ, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) vs. ) ) STATE OF NEVADA, et al., ) ) Defendants. ) ____________________________) PRESENT: 3:06-cv-00628-LRH (WGC) MINUTES OF THE COURT April 30, 2012 THE HONORABLE WILLIAM G. COBB, U.S. MAGISTRATE JUDGE DEPUTY CLERK: KATIE OGDEN REPORTER: NONE APPEARING COUNSEL FOR PLAINTIFF(S): NONE APPEARING COUNSEL FOR DEFENDANT(S): NONE APPEARING MINUTE ORDER IN CHAMBERS: On March 28, 2012, Plaintiff filed a Motion to Increase Copy Fee Limit. (Doc. # 630.) Plaintiff seeks to increase his NDOC copy work limit to an amount up to and including $1,000.00. (Id.) Plaintiff asserts that he has reached his copy work limit and needs an increase in order to proceed with the remainder of this case. (Id.) Plaintiff requests an increase of $50.00 in order to copy reply briefs, file a motion for injunction and exhibits. (Id.) Plaintiff asserts that he will need an additional $200 for his appeal. (Id.) Defendants have filed a response. (Doc. # 636.) Defendants observe that in general, indigent inmates are given up to $100 in copy credit for legal purposes, which Plaintiff has already exceeded by $650.00. (Id.) The court agrees with Defendants that insofar as an appeal is concerned, the Ninth Circuit will need to determine any proposed increase in Plaintiff’s copy work limit. With respect to the remainder of this case at the district court level, the court finds that an increase in the copy work limit of $25.00, or approximately 250 copies, is reasonable. Therefore, Plaintiff’s motion (Doc. # 630) is GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART. IT IS SO ORDERED. LANCE S. WILSON, CLERK By: /s/ Deputy Clerk

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?