Reed v. Paramo

Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 MYCHAL ANDRA REED, Case No.: 18-cv-00361-JLS-DEB 12 Plaintiff, ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S 13 v. MOTION FOR COPIES 14 D. PARAMO, et al., 15 Defendants. [ECF No. 240] 16 17 Presently before the Court is pro se Plaintiff Mychal Andra Reed’s “Request for 18 Copy of His Opposition to Magistrate[’]s Report and Recommendation.” (ECF No. 240.) 19 In his motion, Plaintiff requests that the Court send him a copy of his “opposition 20 documents” to Magistrate Judge Butcher’s Report and Recommendation (“R&R”) so that 21 Plaintiff “can authenticate that they are the actual documents that he sent” to the Court and 22 verify that prison staff did not “tamper” with them. (Id. at 3–4.) Plaintiff also requests that 23 the Court provide him with “the current status of the case.” (Id. at 5.) 24 Plaintiff’s request for a copy of his Objection to Judge Butcher’s R&R at the Court’s 25 expense is hereby DENIED. Although Plaintiff is proceeding in forma pauperis, the 26 statute providing authority to proceed in forma pauperis, 28 U.S.C. § 1915, does not 27 include the right to obtain court documents without payment. See Sands v. Lewis, 889 F.2d 28 1166, 1169 (9th Cir. 1990) (per curiam) (stating that prisoners have no constitutional right 1 || to free photocopy services), overruled on other grounds by Lewis v. Casey, 518 U.S. 343, 2 ||350—55 (1996); see also In re Richard, 914 F.2d 1526, 1527 (6th Cir. 1990) ([28 U.S.C. 3 ||§ 1915] does not give the litigant a right to have documents copied and returned to him at 4 government expense.”). As to Plaintiffs status request, Plaintiff's Objection to Judge 5 || Butcher’s R&R is pending before the Court, and the Court has taken the matter under 6 ||submission. In due course, the Court will rule on Plaintiff's Objection. 7 IT IS SO ORDERED. 8 || Dated: November 15, 2021 . tt 9 pee Janis L. Sammartino 10 United States District Judge 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28