Long v. Page

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE EASTERN DIVISION

BRIAN MARQUINCE LONG, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) VS. ) No. 18-1121-JDT-cgc ) STEPHEN PAGE, ET AL., ) ) Defendants. )

ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR ENTIRE DEPOSITION

The pro se prisoner Plaintiff, Brian Marquince Long, has filed another motion asking the Court to require Defendant’s counsel to provide him with a complete copy of his own deposition rather than the brief excerpts filed in supprt of Defendant’s motion for summary judgment. (ECF No. 40.) As the Court explained in a previous order, however, Plaintiff is not entitled to a copy of his entire deposition unless he pays the reasonable charges of the court reporter for preparing it. (See ECF No. 34 at PageID 123-24 (citing Fed. R. Civ. P. 30(f)(3) and Dujardine v. Mich. Dep’t of Corr., No. 1:07-cv-701, 2009 WL 3401172, at *1 (W.D. Mich. Oct. 19, 2009) (even indigent parties proceeding pro se must “bear[] their own litigation expenses.”)).) Plaintiff’s motion for a copy of his entire deposition is DENIED. IT IS SO ORDERED. s/ James D. Todd JAMES D. TODD UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE