(PC) Geray v. Cates

8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA JASON GERAY, Case No. 1:21-cv-00593-AWI-HBK (PC) 12 Plaintiff, ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART PLAINTIFF’S 13 v. CONSTRUED MOTION BRIAN CATES, K. NOUWEIS, (Doc. No. 16) 15 Defendants.

17 Plaintiff, Jason Geray, a pretrial detainee is proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis on his initial Complaint filed under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. (Doc. Nos. 1, 10). Pending before the Court is Plaintiff’s construed motion requesting the Court to screen his Complaint. (Doc. No. 16).

20 Plaintiff also requests that the Court provide him a copy of the instant motion. (Id. at 3).

21 Request to Screen Complaint 22 District courts possess inherent authority not governed “by rule or statute, but by control necessarily vested in courts to manage their own affairs so as to achieve the orderly and expeditious disposition of cases.” Dietz v. Bouldin, 136 S. Ct. 1885, 1892 (2016) (citations omitted). And while this Court endeavors to handle all matters as expeditiously as possible, it has “one of the heaviest caseloads in the nation” and operates under a declared judicial emergency due to unfilled judicial vacancies, which is further exacerbated by the Covid-19 pandemic. See Amended Standing Order in Light of Ongoing Judicial Emergency in the Eastern District of | California. This order effectively grants Plaintiff's motion to the extent the Court acknowledges | Plaintiff's Complaint is pending and requires screening. Plaintiff should note any future motions | seeking to “move the case along” will have the opposite effect, as the court will be forced to | divert its attention from screening to addressing such motions.

5 Request for Copy of Instant Motion 6 Neither Plaintiffs pro se status nor his prisoner status entitle him to receive | complimentary copies. Blair v. CDCR, 2018 WL 1959532, at *6 n. 2 (E.D. Cal. Apr. 25, 2018).

8 | The Court previously summarized the relevant Local Rules applicable to pro se cases in its First | Informational Order in Prisoner/Civil Detainee Civil Rights Case filed April 9, 2021. (See Doc.

10 | No. 2). Plaintiffs request for a copy of the instant motion is denied. However, consistent with | statute, the Court will provide copies of the instant motion at $0.50 per page. See 28 U.S.C. § 12 1914. Checks in the exact amount are payable to “Clerk, USDC.” Thus, to the extent Plaintiff | wishes to obtain copies of the requested documents he should forward a check in the amount of | $1.50 to the Clerk if he wishes to obtain these documents 15 Accordingly, it is ORDERED: 16 1. Plaintiff's motion for screening order (Doc. No. 16) is GRANTED to the extent a 17 screening order will be forthcoming.

18 2. Plaintiffs motion for a courtesy copy of the instant motion (Doc. No. 16) is DENIED. | Dated: _ December 12, 2022 Mihaw. Wh. foareh Zaskth 21 HELENA M. BARCH-KUCHTA UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE