Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_18-cv-04898/USCOURTS-azd-2_18-cv-04898-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 550
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Civil Rights (U.S. defendant)
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Prisoner Civil Rights

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

WO KM

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Jamal J. Hill,

Plaintiff, 

v. 

State of Arizona,

Defendants.

No. CV 18-04898-PHX-JAT (JZB)

ORDER

On December 26, 2018, Plaintiff Jamal J. Hill, who is confined in the Arizona State 

Prison Complex-Eyman, filed a pro se civil rights Complaint pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 

§ 1983 and an Application to Proceed In Forma Pauperis. In a March 6, 2019 Order, the 

Court granted the Application to Proceed In Forma Pauperis and dismissed the Complaint. 

Judgment was entered the same day.

On March 18, 2019, Plaintiff filed a Notice of Interlocutory Appeal with the Ninth 

Circuit Court of Appeals. On May 28, 2019, the Ninth Circuit dismissed the appeal; the 

mandate issued on June 20, 2019. On January 28, 2020 Plaintiff filed a second Notice of 

Appeal and a Motion for copies. The Ninth Circuit dismissed the second appeal as

duplicative and stated that to the extent the January 28 Notice of Appeal included a Motion 

for Copies, “the motion is referred to the district court for whatever consideration the 

district court deems appropriate.”

Plaintiff seeks “copies of case #2:18cv04898-JAT-CDB”; Plaintiff does not specify 

the documents for which he seeks copies.

Case 2:18-cv-04898-JAT--CDB Document 20 Filed 03/26/20 Page 1 of 2
- 2 -

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

The Clerk of Court charges 50 cents per page for reproducing any record or paper. 

See Judicial Conference Schedule of Fees & 4, foll. 28 U.S.C. § 1914. An inmate has no 

right to free copies of pleadings. See In Re Richard, 914 F.2d 1526, 127 (6th Cir. 1990) 

(per curiam) (28 U.S.C. § 1915 “does not give a litigant a right to have documents copied 

and returned to him at government expense”). Further, “[t]he Supreme Court has declared 

that ‘the expenditure of public funds [on behalf of an indigent litigant] is proper only when 

authorized by Congress . . . .’” Tedder v. Odel, 890 F.2d 210, 211-12 (9th Cir. 1989) 

(quoting United States v. MacCollom, 426 U.S. 317, 321 (1976). The in forma pauperis

statute, 28 U.S.C. § 1915, does not authorize the Court to pay the costs for an indigent 

litigant’s general copy requests. Cf. Dixon v. Ylst, 990 F.2d 478, 480 (9th Cir. 1993) 

(Section 1915 does not authorize the district courts to waive payment of fees or expenses 

for witnesses); Tedder, 890 F.2d at 211-12 (same). The Court will therefore deny 

Plaintiff’s Motion for Copies.

IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Motion for Copies (filed with the Notice of 

Appeal at Doc. 17) is denied. This case must remain closed.

Dated this 26th day of March, 2020.

Case 2:18-cv-04898-JAT--CDB Document 20 Filed 03/26/20 Page 2 of 2