Acosta

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 BARRY L. BROOKINS, Case No. 1:19-cv-00401-JLT-HBK Plaintiff, ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR COPY v. (Doc. No. 27) F. ACOSTA, Defendant. 16 Pending is Plaintiff’s motion requesting a courtesy copy of the “first amended complaint” dated “March 25, 2019.” (Doc. No. 27 at 1). Plaintiff provides no reason why he requires a copy of the pleading requested. Plaintiff’s request for a copy of his first amended complaint, or a copy of any pleading, should be directed to the clerk’s office, not to the court via a motion. Plaintiff is reminded that “proceeding in forma pauperis does not entitle a party to the waiver of anything other than court filing fees.” Martin v. McNut, 2011 WL 4543039, at *1 (E.D. Cal. Sept. 28, 2011). Nor does plaintiff’s pro se or prisoner status entitle him to receive complimentary copies. Blair v. CDCR, 2018 WL 1959532, at *6 f. 2 (E.D. Cal. Apr. 25, 2018). Consistent with statute, the court will…