Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_08-cv-00590/USCOURTS-azd-2_08-cv-00590-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 555
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Prison Condition
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

Laura L. Medley, 

Plaintiff, 

vs.

Timothy Overton, 

Defendant. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. CV 08-590-PHX-MHM (DKD)

ORDER

Plaintiff Laura L. Medley, who is confined in the Maricopa County Lower Buckeye

Jail, filed a pro se civil rights Complaint pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On May 8, 2008, the

Court dismissed the Complaint for failure to state a claim. Plaintiff filed a Notice of Appeal

on May 14, 2008 (Doc. #8).

On June 2, 2008, Plaintiff filed a Motion for Copy of Entire Docket (Doc. #12). The

Court will grant the Motion to the extent that the Court will provide Plaintiff with a copy of

the Court’s electronic docket. 

To the extent that Plaintiff is seeking copies of every document filed in this case, the

Court will deny the Motion. 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, the Ninth Circuit

has rejected any constitutional right to unlimited free photocopying. See Johnson v. Moore,

Case 2:08-cv-00590-MHM--DKD Document 13 Filed 06/23/08 Page 1 of 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

- 2 -

936 F.2d 921, 923 (9th Cir. 1991) (per curiam), superceded on other grounds, 948 F.2d 517

(9th Cir. 1991) (per curiam); and Sands v. Lewis, 886 F.2d 1166, 1169 (9th Cir. 1989)

(rejecting any constitutional right to free and unlimited photocopying) (citing Jones v.

Franzen, 697 F.2d 801, 803 (7th Cir. 1983) (“[B]road as the constitutional concept of liberty

is, it does not include the right to xerox.”)). Accordingly, the Clerk of Court will provide

Plaintiff with copies of documents filed in this case only upon receipt of a written request

accompanied by payment of the 50 cents per page copy fee.

IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiff’s June 2, 2008 Motion for Copy of Entire Docket

(Doc. #12) is granted to the extent that the Clerk of Court must provide Plaintiff with a copy

of the Court’s electronic docket. Plaintiff’s Motion is denied with respect to all other relief

requested.

DATED this 19th day of June, 2008.

Case 2:08-cv-00590-MHM--DKD Document 13 Filed 06/23/08 Page 2 of 2