IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEBRASKA

SUSANNE BECKER,

Plaintiff, 

vs. 

JAMES THOMAS HURD,

Defendant.

8:23CV208

ORDER

SUSANNE BECKER,

Plaintiff, 

vs. 

RANDALL COUNTY COURT,

Defendant.

8:23CV270

ORDER

SUSANNE BECKER,

Plaintiff, 

vs. 

FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF OMAHA, 

JEAN RHODES, MARK SCHMIDT, and 

CINDY SCHMIDT,

Defendants.

8:23CV275

ORDER

SUSANNE BECKER HURD,

Plaintiff, 

vs. 

LYNETTE STODDARD, AUDREY M. 

ELLIOT LONG, MARK R. SCHMIDT, and 

8:23CV278

ORDER

8:23-cv-00208-JFB-PRSE Doc # 10 Filed: 07/25/23 Page 1 of 7 - Page ID # 33
2

CINDY SCHMIDT,

Defendants.

SUSANNE BECKER,

Plaintiff, 

vs. 

JAMES REGEAN, Individual capacity, 

official capacity;

Defendant.

8:23CV279

ORDER

SUSANN BECKER HURD,

Plaintiff, 

vs. 

KADEE BAYLESS, and COURTNEY R. 

GLIEM,

Defendants.

8:23CV284

ORDER

SUSANN BECKER HURD,

Plaintiff, 

vs. 

AUDREY LONG, MARK SCHMIDT, 

CYTHIA SCHMIDT, SCOTTSBLUFF 

PUBLIC SCHOOL DISTRICT, and AULICK,

Defendants.

8:23CV285

ORDER

8:23-cv-00208-JFB-PRSE Doc # 10 Filed: 07/25/23 Page 2 of 7 - Page ID # 34
3

SUSANN BECKER HURD,

Plaintiff, 

vs. 

KIRK FELLHOELTER, KRISTEN MICKEY, 

AUDREY MILLER, KADEE BAYLESS, 

MICHAEL MODEC, SCOTTSBLUFF 

COUNTY COURT, and SCOTTSBLUFF 

PUBLIC SCHOOL DISTRICT,

Defendants.

8:23CV286

ORDER

SUSANNE BECKER HURD,

Plaintiff, 

vs. 

STATE OF NEBRASKA, CITY OF 

SCOTTSBLUFF, and SCOTTSBLUFF 

COUNTY COURT,

Defendants.

8:23CV288

ORDER

SUSANN BECKER,

Plaintiff, 

vs. 

SCOTTSBLUFF COUNTY SHERIFF,

Defendant.

8:23CV293

ORDER

SUSANNE BECKER,

Plaintiff, 

vs. 

8:23CV294

ORDER

8:23-cv-00208-JFB-PRSE Doc # 10 Filed: 07/25/23 Page 3 of 7 - Page ID # 35
4

SCOTTS BLUFF COUNTY, 

SCOTTSBLUFF CITY, GERING CITY, and 

STATE OF NEBRASKA,

Defendants.

SUSANN BECKER HURD,

Plaintiff, 

vs. 

AUDERY ELLIOT LONG,

Defendant.

8:23CV295

ORDER

SUSANNE BECKER HURD,

Plaintiff, 

vs. 

COUNTY OF SCOTTSBLUFF, and CITY 

OF GERING,

Defendants.

8:23CV302

ORDER

The above-captioned cases are before the Court on e-mails sent by Plaintiff 

Susanne Becker, also known as Susanne Becker Hurd,1to the Clerk of the Court, which 

were filed at the direction of the Court as motions in each of Plaintiff’s 13 pending pro se 

cases. On July 20, 2023, Plaintiff emailed the Clerk’s office stating that her PACER 

account was deactivated on February 15, 2022, and asking that her PACER account be 

reinstated for e-filing. On July 21, 2023, at the Court’s direction, the Clerk’s office 

responded to Plaintiff, stating her electronic filing privileges could not be reinstated 

1 Plaintiff also identifies herself as “Susann” Becker or “Susann” Becker Hurd in Case Nos. 8:23CV284, 

8:23CV285, 8:23CV286, 8:23CV293, and 8:23CV295.

8:23-cv-00208-JFB-PRSE Doc # 10 Filed: 07/25/23 Page 4 of 7 - Page ID # 36
5

because, “[p]ursuant to case 8:21CV75 Hurd v. Harwood, et al., filing 152, your 

electronic filing privileges were terminated.” E.g., Filing No. 8, Case No. 8:23CV208. 

Thereafter, Plaintiff replied to the Clerk’s office objecting to the denial of her request, 

and the Court directed the Clerk’s office to file Plaintiff’s emails as a motion in her open 

cases.

On March 16, 2022, the Court, in an order entered by Chief Judge Robert F. 

Rossiter, Jr., dismissed a previous case filed by Plaintiff, Hurd v. Harwood, et al., 8:21-

cv-00075-RFR-SMB (D. Neb. Mar. 16, 2022) (Filing No. 152). In doing so, the Court 

addressed eleven more filings submitted by Plaintiff after her motion for voluntary 

dismissal none of which had “anything to do with the initial matter presented before the 

Court in this pro se action.” Id. at 1. The Court further noted “this string of recent filings 

is just another example of how Becker has severely abused the privilege of using the 

Court’s electronic case filing system (“CM/ECF”).” Id. Because “CM/ECF access is not 

routinely granted to pro se parties,” the Court concluded that Plaintiff’s “failure to comply 

with CM/ECF procedures justifies terminating that privilege, especially given her recent 

multiple daily filings of nonsensical and unrelated ‘pleadings.’” Id. (citing NEGenR 1.3). 

The Court then directed the Clerk of Court to terminate Plaintiff’s electronic filing access 

to this Court’s CM/ECF system in all her then-existing cases and required Plaintiff to file 

any new cases in this Court either “in-person at the Clerk’s Office in Omaha or Lincoln, 

or by mail to the Omaha Clerk’s Office.” Id. at 2.

Pursuant to the order in Case No. 8:21CV75, Plaintiff did file each of her 13 new 

cases by mail, but now seeks to continue in the cases with electronic filing privileges. 

Because the order in Case No. 8:21CV75 does not clearly bar Plaintiff’s electronic filing 

8:23-cv-00208-JFB-PRSE Doc # 10 Filed: 07/25/23 Page 5 of 7 - Page ID # 37
6

access once her new case is on file, the Court will grant her request to reinstate her 

PACER account to the extent that Plaintiff may request electronic filing access in any of 

her presently pending cases. If Plaintiff wishes to reinstate her PACER account using 

her existing account that the Court has on record, then she must e-mail the Clerk of 

Court at NEDdb_Clerk_Mail@ned.uscourts.gov and specifically identify for which cases 

she would like to have electronic filing access.

Plaintiff is warned, however, not to interpret the Court’s limited reinstatement of 

her electronic filing access as a license to litter the Court’s docket with multiple, 

nonsensical filings or generally use this Court and her cases as “message boards for 

[Plaintiff] to air a variety of real or imaginary grievances she claims to have suffered.” 

Filing No. 152, Case No. 8:21CV75. Moreover, the Court will not tolerate Plaintiff’s use 

of any abusive or demeaning language directed at the Clerk’s Office or this Court, and 

her filings in this Court must comply with federal and local pleading rules. To that end, 

Plaintiff is advised that, at this early stage in each of her cases, she may only file 

documents as directed by the Court and shall not file any documents without leave of 

Court until after the Court has conducted an initial review of each of her complaints 

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e).

2

 If Plaintiff abuses her electronic filing access by 

repeatedly filing irrelevant and/or frivolous filings, then the Court will strike her filings 

and/or terminate her access.

2 As of the date of this Memorandum and Order, the only cases in which Plaintiff needs to file anything as

directed by the Court is (1) Case No. 8:23CV285, in which Plaintiff needs to file a signed copy of her 

complaint, see Filing No. 4 & Filing No. 8, Case No. 8:23CV285 ((June 29, 2023 text order and July 25, 

2023 Order directing Plaintiff to correct the signature deficiency), and (2) Case No. 8:23CV294, in which 

Plaintiff needs to file a signed copy of her motion to proceed in forma pauperis, see Filing No. 9 & Filing 

No. 10 (July 25, 2023 text order directing Plaintiff to correct signature deficiency).

8:23-cv-00208-JFB-PRSE Doc # 10 Filed: 07/25/23 Page 6 of 7 - Page ID # 38
7

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that: 

1. Plaintiff’s motions for reinstatement of her electronic filing access, Filing 

No. 8, Case No. 8:23CV208; Filing No. 6, Case No. 8:23CV270; Filing No. 6, Case No. 

8:23CV275; Filing No. 6, Case No. 8:23CV278; Filing No. 7, Case No. 8:23CV279; 

Filing No. 6, Case No. 8:23CV284; Filing No. 6, Case No. 8:23CV285; Filing No. 6, 

Case No. 8:23CV286; Filing No. 6, Case No. 8:23CV288; Filing No. 6, Case No. 

8:23CV293; Filing No. 5, Case No. 8:23CV294; Filing No. 7, Case No. 8:23CV295; 

Filing No. 5, Case No. 8:23CV302, are granted.

2. Plaintiff may reinstate her PACER account using her existing account that 

the Court has on record by e-mailing the Clerk of Court at 

NEDdb_Clerk_Mail@ned.uscourts.gov and specifically identifying the cases for which

she would like to have electronic filing access.

3. The Clerk of Court is directed to mail a copy of this Order to Plaintiff at her 

address on file with the Court and transmit a copy of this Order to Plaintiff via e-mail in 

response to her recent e-mails to the Clerk’s Office.

Dated this 25th day of July, 2023.

BY THE COURT:

Joseph F. Bataillon

Senior United States District Judge

8:23-cv-00208-JFB-PRSE Doc # 10 Filed: 07/25/23 Page 7 of 7 - Page ID # 39