From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Mitchell v. Phillip Fredric Newsom

United States District Court, D. South Carolina
May 10, 2011
C/A No. 3:11-0869-CMC-PJG (D.S.C. May. 10, 2011)

Opinion

C/A No. 3:11-0869-CMC-PJG.

May 10, 2011


ORDER


This is a civil action filed by a pro se litigant. Under Local Civil Rule 73.02 DSC, pretrial proceedings in this action have been referred to the undersigned United States Magistrate Judge.

It appears from financial information submitted to the Court that Plaintiff should be relieved of the obligation to prepay the full filing fee. Plaintiff's motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis (ECF No. 2) is granted, subject to the Court's right to require a payment if Plaintiff's financial condition changes, and to tax fees and costs against Plaintiff at the conclusion of this case if the Court finds the case to be without merit. Flint v. Haynes, 651 F.2d 970, 972-74 (4th Cir. 1981).

TO THE CLERK OF COURT:

The above-captioned case is subject to summary dismissal. Hence, the Office of the Clerk of Court is directed not to authorize the issuance and service of process in the above-captioned case, unless instructed by a United States District Judge or a Senior United States District Judge to do so.

TO PLAINTIFF:

Any future filings by Plaintiff in this case should be sent to the Clerk's Office in Columbia (901 Richland Street, Columbia, South Carolina 29201). Plaintiff must place the civil action number (C/A No.) listed above on any document he submits to this Court in connection with the above-captioned case. All pleadings filed in this case by Plaintiff shall be signed by Plaintiff with his full legal name written in his own handwriting. Pro se litigants, such as Plaintiff, shall not use the "s/typed name" format used in the Electronic Case Filing System. In any future filings in this case, Plaintiff is directed to use letter-size (8½ inches by 11 inches) paper, to write or type text on one side of a sheet of paper only, and not to write or type on both sides of any sheet of paper. Plaintiff is further instructed not to write to the edge of the paper, but to maintain one-inch margins on the top, bottom, and sides of each paper submitted.

Plaintiff is a pro se litigant. His attention is directed to the following important notice:

You are ordered to always keep the Clerk of Court advised in writing (901 Richland Street, Columbia, South Carolina 29201) if your address changes for any reason, so as to assure that orders or other matters that specify deadlines for you to meet will be received by you. If as a result of your failure to comply with this order, you fail to file something you are required to file within a deadline set by a District Judge or a Magistrate Judge, your case may be dismissed for violating this order. Therefore, if you have a change of address before this case is ended, you must comply with his order by immediately advising the Clerk of Court in writing of such change of address and providing the Clerk of Court with the docket numbers of all pending cases you have filed with this Court. Your failure to do so will not be excused by the Court.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

May 6, 2011

Columbia, South Carolina

IMPORTANT INFORMATION . . . PLEASE READ CAREFULLY WARNING TO PRO SE PARTY OR NONPARTY FILERS

All Documents That You File with the Court Will Be Available to the Public on the Internet Through Pacer (Public Access to Court Electronic Records) and the Court's Electronic Case Filing System. CERTAIN PERSONAL IDENTIFYING INFORMATION SHOULD NOT BE INCLUDED IN OR SHOULD BE REMOVED FROM ALL DOCUMENTS BEFORE YOU SUBMIT THE DOCUMENTS TO THE COURT FOR FILING.

Rule 5.2 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure provides for privacy protection of electronic or paper filings made with the court. Rule 5.2 applies to ALL documents submitted for filing, including pleadings, exhibits to pleadings, discovery responses, and any other document submitted by any party or nonparty for filing. Unless otherwise ordered by the court, a party or nonparty filer should not put certain types of an individual's personal identifying information in documents submitted for filing to any United States District Court. If it is necessary to file a document that already contains personal identifying information, the personal identifying information should be " blacked out" or redacted prior to submitting the document to the Office of the Clerk of Court for filing. A person filing any document containing their own personal identifying information waives the protection of Rule 5.2(a) by filing the information without redaction and not under seal.

1. Personal information protected by Rule 5.2(a):

(a) Social Security and Taxpayer identification numbers. If an individual's social security number or a taxpayer identification number must be included in a document, the filer may include only the last four digits of that number.

(b) Names of Minor Children. If the involvement of a minor child must be mentioned, the filer may include only the initials of that child.

(c) Dates of Birth. If an individual's date of birth must be included in a document, the filer may include only the year of birth.

(d) Financial Account Numbers. If financial account numbers are relevant, the filer may include only the last four digits of these numbers.

2. Protection of other sensitive personal information — such as driver's license numbers and alien registration numbers — may be sought under Rule 5.2(d) (Filings Made Under Seal) and (e) (Protective Orders).


Summaries of

Mitchell v. Phillip Fredric Newsom

United States District Court, D. South Carolina
May 10, 2011
C/A No. 3:11-0869-CMC-PJG (D.S.C. May. 10, 2011)
Case details for

Mitchell v. Phillip Fredric Newsom

Case Details

Full title:Kenneth R. Mitchell, aka Kenneth Ray Mitchell, Plaintiff, v. Phillip…

Court:United States District Court, D. South Carolina

Date published: May 10, 2011

Citations

C/A No. 3:11-0869-CMC-PJG (D.S.C. May. 10, 2011)

Citing Cases

Wilson v. Greenville Cnty. Sheriff's Office

The Public Index for the Greenville County Clerk of Court website…

Taylor v. McGhaney

A federal court may take judicial notice of factual information located in postings on governmental websites…