Hill et al v. County of Niagara et al

Filing 199

DECISION & ORDER Hill's motion for permission to electronically file documents on the Court's electronic filing system 195 is denied without prejudice. Signed by Hon. Marian W. Payson on 11/21/2023. (KAH)This was mailed to: Plaintiffs Michael Hill and Karen Pittman.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
_______________________________________
MICHAEL HILL and KAREN PITTMAN,
Plaintiffs,
v.

DECISION & ORDER
18-CV-6022EAW

THOMAS LOUGHREN,
Defendant.
_______________________________________

Plaintiffs Michael Hill and Karen Pittman, acting pro se, filed a complaint
asserting claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against defendant Thomas Loughren, Commissioner of
the New York State Commission of Correction. (Docket ## 16, 22). Hill has another matter
pending in the Western District of New York. See Hill v. Annucci, 21-CV-6373. In that matter,
he filed a letter that appears to request permission to file documents electronically on the Court’s
electronic filing system. (See 21-CV-6373, Docket # 49). That letter contained a reference to
this case and appears to request leave to file electronically in this matter as well. (Docket # 195).
Rule 5 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure provides that a pro se litigant “may
file electronically only if allowed by court order or by local rule.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 5(d)(3)(B)(i).
The Local Rules of Civil Procedure incorporate by reference the Court’s CM/ECF
Administrative Procedures Guide (“the Guide”), which in turn sets forth the requirements and
procedures for electronic filing. See W.D.N.Y. Local Rule 5.1(a). The Guide allows the Court
in its discretion to “grant a pro se litigant who demonstrates a willingness and capability to file
documents electronically, permission to register to do so.” W.D.N.Y. Administrative Procedures
Guide for Electronic Filing, Administrative Procedures.

To the extent Hill’s submission may be interpreted as a request for permission to
file electronically in this case, the Court declines to exercise its discretion to allow him to do so.
In his motion, Hill has not provided any reason why he seeks permission to file electronically,
and review of the docket suggests that Hill has had no difficulty filing letters and motions with
the Court by mailing or presenting them to the Clerk’s Office. “Because [Hill] has not provided
a persuasive reason for the Court to grant his motion for permission to use the electronic filing
system, [Hill’s] motion is denied without prejudice.” See Zuccarino v. Town of Hector, 2020
WL 2319870, *1 (W.D.N.Y. 2020).

CONCLUSION
For the reasons discussed above, Hill’s motion for permission to electronically
file documents on the Court’s electronic filing system (Docket # 195) is DENIED without
prejudice.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
s/Marian W. Payson
MARIAN W. PAYSON
United States Magistrate Judge
Dated: Rochester, New York
November 21, 2023

2