Greer v. Harreld

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO EASTERN DIVISION

STEVEN E. GREER,

Plaintiff, Civil Action 2:22-cv-3443 v. Judge Sarah D. Morrison Magistrate Judge Chelsey M. Vascura SUSAN G. HERRELD, et al., Defendants.

ORDER Plaintiff Steve E. Greer, who is proceeding without the assistance of counsel, has filed a Motion for ECF Filing Rights. (ECF No. 3.) The Court construes Plaintiff’s motion as a motion for leave to file electronically. Plaintiff represents that he has “many years of experience with ECF Filing” in another United States District Court and that he has taken a training course. (Id.) Plaintiff’s Complaint indicates that his email address is as follows: [email protected]. (ECF No. 1.)

Although parties proceeding pro se are not allowed to file electronically, “[a] pro se individual may apply to the assigned judicial office for permission to electronically file documents.” Southern District of Ohio Electronic Case Filing Procedures Guide (rev. June 2019), p.4. Under the circumstances of this specific case, Plaintiff’s request to participate in e- filing in this court (ECF No. 3) is GRANTED to the extent that he may participate in e-filing only as to this particular case and conditional on his compliance with all applicable e-filing requirements. The Clerk is DIRECTED to register Plaintiff for e-filing using the email address that he provided in the Complaint.

Plaintiff is REMINDED that failure to adhere to all applicable e-filing requirements will likely result in the revocation of permission to participate in e-filing. Plaintiff is specifically CAUTIONED that failure to update his email address and monitor his email account (including his “junk mail” or spam folder) for court filings may result in the Court’s dismissal of the action.

Cf. Yeschick v. Mineta, 675 F.3d 622, 630 (6th Cir. 2012) (affirming district court’s denial of motion for relief from judgment where counsel’s neglect in failing to check docket until more than a month after he learned he was not receiving notice of electric filing because he failed to update his email address on file with the district court); Equal Emp’t Opportunity Comm’n v. Indi’s Fast Food Rest., Inc., No. 3:15-cv-0059, 2016 WL 7473130, at *6 (W.D. Ky. Dec. 28, 2016) (noting that defense counsel represented that “he did not receive any Court-related noticed or emails because they were all sent to his ‘junk mail’ folder” and finding that “[d]efense counsel’s non-receipt of emails does not relieve his responsibility to monitor the Court’s docket and keep apprised of developments within his active cases, which he failed to do.”)

IT IS SO ORDERED.

/s/ Chelsey M. Vascura CHELSEY M. VASCURA UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE