Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Turner v. High Desert State Prison

United States District Court, District of Nevada

April 27, 2015

JOHN TURNER, Plaintiff,
v.
HIGH DESERT STATE PRISON, et al., Defendants.

ORDER

CAM FERENBACH UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

This matter involves incarcerated pro se Plaintiff John Turner’s civil rights action against High Desert State Prison, et al. Before the court are the following motions:

1. Plaintiff's Motion for File Stamped Copy of Response (#121), 2. Plaintiff's Motion for a Claim that Prison Officials Violated Plaintiff's "Due Process Rights" (#122).

On April 24, 2015, Defendants filed their oppositions to Plaintiff's motions (#124 and 125). Plaintiff is seeking for two file stamped copies of his response to the order to show cause. (#121). The right to meaningful access to the courts does not confer a right to free unlimited photocopies. See Sands v. Lewis, 886 F.2d 1166 (9th Cir. 1989) (citing Jones v. Franzen, 697 F.2d 801, 803 (“[B]road as the constitutional concert of liberty is, it does not include the right to xerox.” (7thCir. 1983)); see also Wanninger v. Davenport, 697 F.2d 992, 994 (11th Cir. 1983); Johnson v. Parke, 642 F.2d 377, 380 (10th Cir. 1981); Harrell v. Keohane, 621 F.2d 1059, 1060-61 (10th Cir. 1980). The court clerk is not required to make a free copy of plaintiff’s file-stamped document and mail it to him.

Pursuant to Local Rule 10-4, [c]ounsel or persons appearing in pro se who wish to receive a file stamped copy of any pleading or other paper must submit one (1) additional copy. Here, plaintiff did not provide the court clerk an extra copy to be mailed back to him. It is plaintiff’s responsibility to maintain his own records. In light of Judge Jennifer Dorsey's order to show cause (#118), the court will allow plaintiff to obtain one file stamped copy of his response to order to show cause (#120) for his records. In the future if plaintiff would like a file-stamped copy to be mailed back to him, he must include an extra copy of that document.

In Plaintiff's Motion for Claim that Prison Officials Violated Plaintiff "Due Process Rights" (#122), Plaintiff seeks to amend his complaint and insert an additional claim. Pursuant to Local Rule 15-1(a), [u]nless otherwise permitted by the Court, the moving party shall attached the proposed amended pleading to any motion to amend, so that it will be complete in itself without reference to the superseding pleading. An amended pleading shall include copies of all exhibits referred to in such pleading. Here, plaintiff has failed to attach his amended complaint. Plaintiff’s motion is denied.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff's Motion for File Stamped Copy of Response (#121) is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part.

The Clerk of Court is directed to mail Plaintiff one copy of his response to order to show cause (#120).

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff's Motion for Claim that Prison Officials Violated Plaintiff "Due Process Rights" (#122) is DENIED.

NOTICE

Pursuant to Local Rules IB 3-1 and IB 3-2, a party may object to orders and reports and recommendations issued by the magistrate judge. Objections must be in writing and filed with the Clerk of the Court within fourteen days. LR IB 3-1, 3-2. The Supreme Court has held that the courts of appeal may determine that an appeal has been waived due to the failure to file objections within the specified time. Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 142 (1985). This circuit has also held that (1) failure to file objections within the specified time and (2) failure to properly address and brief the objectionable issues waives the right to appeal the District Court's order and/or appeal factual issues from the order of the District Court. Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153, 1157 (9th Cir. 1991); Britt v. Simi Valley United Sch. Dist., 708 F.2d 452, 454 (9th Cir. 1983).

Pursuant to Local Special Rule 2-2, the Plaintiff must immediately file written notification with the court of any change of address. The notification must include proof of service upon each opposing party of the party’s attorney. Failure to comply with this Rule may result in dismissal of the action. See LSR 2-2.


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.