Wilder v. Holder

Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA SOUTHERN DIVISION No. 7:14-CV-215-BO LAWRENCE VERLINE WILDER, SR., _) Plaintiff, V. ORDER ATTORNEY GENERAL ERIC HOLDER, Defendant.

This matter is before the Court on a motion by plaintiff, proceeding pro se, seeking courtesy copies. Plaintiff has also filed a motion seeking to change venue, notice of an appeal, a hearing, and recusal of the undersigned. Plaintiff has included nine cases in the caption of each motion. Plaintiffs motions are difficult to decipher and do not appear to provide the Court with any basis upon which to provide plaintiff with any relief. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 7(b); see also United States v. Glass, 317 F.2d 200, 202 (4th Cir. 1963) (indigent party must show particularized need to obtain copies at government expense). Accordingly, plaintiff's motions [DE 37 & 44] are DENIED. However, to the extent [DE 44] can be construed as a notice of appeal, the Clerk of Court is DIRECTED to transmit [DE 44] to the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals.

SO ORDERED, this pf day of August 2024.

LAAMEL dekanteet Mog UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE