Cochrane v. Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department et al

Filing 121

MINUTE ORDER IN CHAMBERS of the Honorable Magistrate Judge William G. Cobb, on 1/10/2013.Motion for Extension of Copywork Limit 120 is GRANTED. Request limited to $10.00 to be used in this case only. Motion to Extend Time to Fil e Reply 119 re Motion to Hold in Contempt 114 is GRANTED. Reply due January 24, 2013. There will be no further extensions. Please see order for further details. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - JC)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF NEVADA
TERRY R. COCHRANE,
Plaintiff,
vs.
LAS VEGAS METROPOLITAN
POLICE DEPARTMENT, et. al.
Defendants.

PRESENT:

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

3:11-cv-00092-LRH (WGC)
MINUTE ORDER
January 10, 2013

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:
Before the court are Plaintiff’s Motion for Enlargement of Time (Doc. # 119) and
Emergency Motion for Extension of Copywork (Doc. # 120).
Plaintiff seeks an extension of time in the amount of thirty days to file his reply in
response to Defendants’ opposition to his Motion to hold Thomas D. Dillard in
Contempt. In addition, Plaintiff seeks an extension of his copywork limit so that he may
attach evidence to this reply and in the event he has to file an appeal. The court will
address the copywork motion (Doc. # 120) first.
An inmate plaintiff does not have a right to free photocopying. Johnson v.
Moore, 948 F.2d 517, 521 (9th Cir. 1991); Sands v. Lewis, 886 F.2d 1166, 1169 (9th Cir.
1989) (“numerous courts have rejected any constitutional right to free and unlimited
photocopying”). Nevada Department of Corrections (NDOC) Administrative Regulation
(AR) 722 governs copying of legal documents by inmates, and provides, “[c]opies of
legal documents requested by inmates may be made for a nominal fee.” AR 722.01(9),
available at http://www.doc.nv.gov/?q=node/68. “Inmates can only accrue a maximum
of $100 debt for copy work expenses for all cases, not per case.” Id.
///

MINUTES OF THE COURT
3:11-cv-00092-LRH-WGC
Date: January 10, 2013
Page 2
A court may order a prison to provide additional photocopying when the prisoner
demonstrates that an increase is necessary for an inmate to provide copies to the court
and other parties. See, e.g., Allen v. Clark County Detention Center, 2011 WL 886343,
at * 2 (D. Nev. March 11, 2011).
The court will GRANT Plaintiff’s request for an extension of the copywork limit,
but such request is limited to $10.00 TO BE USED IN THIS CASE ONLY. If
Plaintiff needs additional extensions in order to file an appeal, he must seek such relief
from the appellate court.
Now, the court will address Plaintiff’s motion for extension of time to file his
reply brief. (Doc. # 119.) Plaintiff filed the underlying motion to hold Defendants’
attorney, Thomas Dillard, in contempt on November 28, 2012. (Doc. # 114.)
Defendants filed their response on December 17, 2012. (Doc. # 116.) Pursuant to the
local rules, any reply brief is to be filed and served seven days after service of a
responsive brief. L.R. 7-2(c). Therefore, Plaintiff’s reply brief should have been filed
and served on or before December 24, 2012. Instead, Plaintiff waited until January 9,
2013, to file the instant motion for an extension of time.
The court will allow Plaintiff a brief extension of time within which to file his
reply brief; however, he is reminded that future filings that do not comply with the rules
of this district will not be considered. Plaintiff shall have up to and including
January 24, 2013 to file and serve his reply brief. THERE WILL BE NO
FURTHER EXTENSIONS.

IT IS SO ORDERED.
LANCE S. WILSON, CLERK
By: /s/
Deputy Clerk