Oliver
Oliver v. River City Process Service, Inc.
Opinion
Trial Court Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 ANTHONY OLIVER, Case No.: 23-cv-1739-DMS-DDL Plaintiff,
ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S
v. MOTION TO FILE
ELECTRONICALLY
RIVER CITY PROCESS SERVICE, INC. et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 Presently before the Court is pro se Plaintiff Anthony Oliver’s Motion to File Electronically through CM/ECF (“Motion”). (ECF No. 2.) For the following reasons, the Court DENIES Plaintiff’s Motion. Generally, “[e]xcept as prescribed by local rule, order, or other procedure, the Court has designated all cases to be assigned to the Electronic Filing System.” Civ. L.R. 5.4(a). With respect to pro se litigants, however, “[u]nless otherwise authorized by the court, all documents submitted for filing to the Clerk's Office . . . must be in legible, paper form.” Office of the Clerk, United States District Court for the Southern District of California, Electronic Case Filing Administrative Policies and Procedures Manual, § 2(b) (2018). “A 27 …