Glenn v. Americo

Opinion

1 2 3 4

5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON 9 AT SEATTLE 10 11 TRAVIS GLENN, CASE NO. 2:24-cv-00184-TL 12 Plaintiff, ORDER ON MOTION FOR RELIEF v. FROM PACER FEES 13 AMERICO, 14 Defendant. 15

17 This matter is before the Court on Plaintiff Travis Glenn’s Motion for Relief from 18 PACER Fees. Dkt. No. 56. Having reviewed the motion and the relevant record, the Court 19 DENIES Plaintiff’s motion. 20 “The PACER System acts as a portal to information stored on the Court’s Case 21 Management/Electronic Case Files (“CM/ECF”) system.” Nelson v. Sorrento Tower Apartments, 22 No. C21-1554, 2023 WL 3061843, at *1 (S.D. Cal. Apr. 24, 2023). Plaintiff asserts that he is 23 “currently locked out of [his PACER] account due to $33.00 of past-due charges.” Dkt. No. 56 at 24 1 1. He notes that he is pursuing his case in forma pauperis and requests that the Court waive the 2 current balance of PACER fees. See id. 3 “Exemptions from PACER user fees are uncommon,” and “[i]n forma pauperis status 4 alone does not support a request to waive PACER fees.” Katumbusi v. Gary, No. C14-1534,

5 2014 WL 5698816, at *4 (E.D. Cal. Oct. 30, 2014). “Through CM/ECF, all parties and attorneys 6 of record receive one free electronic copy of all documents filed electronically.” Nelson, 2023 7 WL 3061843, at *1. If a party is not registered with the court’s CM/ECF system, they will 8 receive a copy of all orders and filed documents via mail. See Katumbusi, 2014 WL 5698816, at 9 *4. Therefore, Plaintiff should have received a free copy of every document on the docket in this 10 matter to date. Further, the fee to access documents through PACER is $0.10 per page retrieved, 11 with the charge for any single document limited to a modest $3.00. See id. 12 In light of the reasonable access provided by the current PACER and Court procedures, 13 Plaintiff has not justified the waiver of PACER fees at this time. See, e.g., Katumbusi, 2014 WL 14 5698816, at *4 (denying motion to waive PACER fees based solely on in forma pauperis status);

15 Nelson, 2023 WL 3061843, at *1 (denying motion to waive PACER fees); Straw v. Avvo, Inc., 16 No. C20-294, 2020 WL 1182932, at *1 (W.D. Wash. Mar. 11, 2020) (same). 17 Accordingly, Plaintiff’s motion is DENIED. 18 Dated this 11th day of December 2024. 19 A 20 Tana Lin United States District Judge 21

23 24