Mehic v. Dana-Farber Cancer Institute

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS

SUADA MEHIC, * * Plaintiff, * * v. * Civil Action No. 15-cv-12934-IT * DANA-FABER CANCER INSTITUTE, * MELISSA CHAMMAS, AND LINDA * SWEENEY, * * Defendants. *

ORDER

December 4, 2019 TALWANI, D.J. Before the court is Plaintiff Suada Mehic’s pro se Motion for Transcript Order [#150], requesting that the court provide Plaintiff, at the government’s expense, with the transcript of the hearing held by the magistrate judge on April 11, 2018. For parties proceeding in forma pauperis, such as Plaintiff, the court may direct government payment of expenses related to printing transcripts, if such transcript is required by the district court. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(c)(1). In addition, fees for transcripts furnished to persons permitted to appeal in forma pauperis shall be paid by the United States if the district court or a circuit judge certifies that the appeal is not frivolous and presents a substantial question. 28 U.S.C. § 753(f). An order is only appropriate if examination of the transcript is necessary to resolve the appeal. Taite v. Bridgewater State Univ., 2018 WL 1972783 at *1 (D. Mass. April 24, 2018). Although Plaintiff is proceeding pro se on appeal, she is represented by counsel with regard to proceedings in this court. Accordingly, to the extent that Plaintiff is seeking the transcript of that proceeding to resolve the pending Motion for Reconsideration [#141], such motion should have been filed by counsel. In any event, this court does not need the requested transcript to resolve the pending motion. To the extent that Plaintiff is seeking the transcript for her appeal of the court’s Memorandum & Order [#138] accepting the magistrate judge’s Memorandum & Order [#127] and Report and Recommendation [#128] and allowing Defendants’ motions for summary

judgment, her motion does not explain why the transcript is necessary for her appeal, where this court’s order was based solely on the written record before the court. The court also is unaware of any substantial question presented by the appeal. Accordingly, Plaintiff’s Motion for Transcript Order [#150] is DENIED. IT IS SO ORDERED. Date: December 4, 2019 /s/ Indira Talwani United States District Judge