Anderson v. Reep

District Court, W.D. North Carolina·Decided March 25, 2024·No. 1:23-cv-00362·Unknown

Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA ASHEVILLE DIVISION CIVIL CASE NO. 1:23-cv-00362-RJC ALBERT ANDERSON, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) vs. ) ORDER ) ) FNU REEP, et al., ) ) Defendants. ) ____________________________________) THIS MATTER is before the Court on the Plaintiff’s recent requests for “courtesy copy of case” [Docs. 23, 25], which the Court construes as a motion for copies of all filings in this proceeding. Pro se Plaintiff Albert Anderson (“Plaintiff”) is a prisoner of the State of North Carolina currently incarcerated at Marion Correctional Institution in Marion, North Carolina. He filed this action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 on December 27, 2023, against 32 Defendants. [Doc. 1]. Plaintiff’s Complaint failed initial review and the Court allowed Plaintiff to amend his Complaint to properly state a claim for relief. [Doc. 12]. Now before the Court is Plaintiff’s motion requesting that the Court send him a “courtesy copy of full case.”1 [Doc. 23; see Doc. 25]. The Court will deny Plaintiff’s motion for copies. Plaintiff failed to include payment for the copies he requests. A litigant is ordinarily required to pay his own litigation expenses, even if he is indigent. See United States v. MacCollom, 426 U.S. 317, 321 (1976) (“The established rule 1 Plaintiff also makes vague and nonsensical reference to “Punctuation Patterns tieing [sic] into a sexual cross-referenced nature” [Doc. 23 at 1] and “illegal acts of Punctuation Patterns being sexual worded” [Doc. 25]in his motion. is that the expenditure of public funds is proper only when authorized by Congress....”). The Court is not a copying service. If Plaintiff needs copies of documents filed in the docket in this matter, he may pay for the copies he seeks at the standard rate of $.50 per page. See https://www.newd.uscourts.gov/court-fees. The Court will, however, instruct the Clerk to provide the Plaintiff with a copy of the current docket sheet as a courtesy. ORDER IT IS, THEREFORE, ORDERED that Plaintiff’s motion [Docs. 23, 25] is DENIED in accordance with the terms of this Order. The Clerk is respectfully instructed to send Plaintiff a copy of the docket sheet in this matter. □□ ISSO ORDERED.

Signed:March 25, 2024

Otef$ 4 Cr Of Robert J. Conrad, Jr. ‘ey United States District Judge “ee

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Anderson v. Reep, (W.D.N.C. 2024).

Anderson v. Reep (Anderson v. Reep) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

United States v. MacCollom
426 U.S. 317 (Supreme Court, 1976)