(PC) Gray v. Khoo

Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10

11 DANA GRAY, ) Case No.: 1:20-cv-01047-DAD-SAB (PC) ) 12 Plaintiff, ) ) ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR 13 v. ) COURTESY COPY OF DEPOSITION TRANSCRIPT 14 A. KHOO, et al., ) ) (ECF No. 82) 15 Defendants. ) ) 16 ) ) 17 )

18 Plaintiff Dana Gray is proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action 19 pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. 20 Currently before the Court is Plaintiff’s motion for a courtesy copy of the deposition transcript, 21 field April 18, 2022. 22 The officer must furnish a copy of the deposition to plaintiff upon payment of reasonable 23 charges. Fed. R. Civ. Pro. 30(f)(3). There is no provision under the Federal Rules or the Local Rules 24 for free copies of deposition transcripts. Further, the expenditure of public funds on behalf of an indigent 25 litigant is proper only when authorized by Congress. See Tedder v. Odel, 890 F.2d 210 (9th Cir. 1989) 26 (citations omitted). The in forma pauperis statute does not authorize the expenditure of public funds for 27 the purpose sought by Plaintiff in the instant motion. 28 1 Accordingly, Plaintiff's request for a copy of the transcript of his deposition, filed April 1 2 || 2022, is DENIED. 3 4 IT IS SO ORDERED. ot fe 5 |! Dated: _ April 20, 2022 OF 6 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28