Maksim Yarmaliuk v. County of Sacramento, et al.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 MAKSIM YARMALIUK,

12 Plaintiff, No. 2:25-cv-01545-TLN-AC

13 14 v. ORDER COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 18 This matter is before the Court on Plaintiff Maksim Yarmaliuk’s (“Plaintiff”) Motion for 19 Reconsideration of the magistrate judge’s July 15, 2025, Order denying Plaintiff’s request to 20 participate in electronic filing (ECF No. 9). For the reasons set forth below, the Court DENIES 21 Plaintiff’s Motion for Reconsideration. 22 /// 23 /// 24 /// 25 /// 26 /// 27 /// 28 /// 1 I. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND 2 Plaintiff, proceeding pro se, initiated this civil action on June 3, 2025. (ECF No. 1.) On 3 June 20, 2025, Plaintiff filed a “Motion to E-File,” in which he requested leave to participate in 4 electronic filing under Local Rule 133(b)(2). (ECF No. 6.) The assigned magistrate judge denied 5 Plaintiff’s request, because it “lack[ed] the necessary information required by the Local Rule.” 6 (ECF No. 8.) However, the assigned…