DEANNA OWENS
v.
COLONIAL IMPORTS, LTD.
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
A pro se plaintiff in a civil litigation matter sought electronic filing (CM/ECF) access in federal district court. The court denied the motion without prejudice, finding the plaintiff failed to demonstrate good cause as required by local administrative procedures, but permitted the plaintiff to receive service of documents via email rather than physical mail.
The court denied the plaintiff's motion for electronic filing access without prejudice because the plaintiff failed to show good cause as required by local administrative procedures. However, the court permitted the plaintiff to receive service of documents via email if she consented by November 7, 2025.
[1] A pro se litigant is generally not permitted to file documents electronically absent a court order.
[2] A pro se litigant may obtain electronic filing access only upon a showing of good cause.
Previewing 2 of 4 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“Absent a court order, a pro se litigant is not permitted to file documents in CM/ECF.”
Establishes the baseline rule restricting pro se electronic filing access under local administrative procedures.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligencePlaintiff Deanna Owens filed a motion requesting electronic filing access in her civil case against Colonial Imports, Ltd. in the Middle District of F…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
This cause comes before the Court on Plaintiff's Motion requesting electronic filing access (“e-filing”). (Doc. 5). Upon consideration, the Motion is due to be denied without prejudice. However, Plaintiff will be permitted to choose to receive service of documents by email rather than physical mail.
This District's CM/ECF Administrative Procedures state that "[a]bsent a court order, a pro se litigant is not permitted to file documents in CM/ECF.” Administrative Procedures for Electronic Filing, § B(4), UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA (effective August 1, 2025). A pro se litigant may only obtain access to e-filing with a showing of good cause. See Fischer v. Dist. Sch. Bd. of Collier Cnty., No. 2:10-cv-512-FtM-29SPC, 2010 WL 3522215, at *1 (M.D. Fla. Sept. 7, 2010); Gerow v. Blackwell, No. 8:24-CV-02280-KKM-NHA, 2024 WL 4679030 (M.D. Fla. Nov. 5, 2024).
Here, Plaintiff has not identified any specific circumstance in this case constituting "good cause” for e-filing access. See Fischer, 2010 WL 3522215, at *1. The Court will, however, permit Plaintiff to receive documents via email rather than by U.S. Mail, as the considerations discussed above do not apply to a pro se party's means of receiving documents. If Plaintiff desires to receive service of documents via email instead of physical mail, Plaintiff may file a notice indicating her consent to receive service of documents via email and providing the email to which documents should be served, on or before November 7, 2025.
Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED that Plaintiff's Motion requesting electronic filing access, (Doc. 5), is DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. Plaintiff shall continue to file documents with the Clerk in paper form, although the Court will allow Plaintiff to receive service of documents via email if she so consents by November 7, 2025.
DONE and ORDERED in Orlando, Florida, on October 28, 2025.
NATHAN W. HILL
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Copies furnished to: Counsel of Record Unrepresented Party
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Owens v. Colonial Imports, Ltd., 2010 WL 3522215 (M.D. Fla. 2025)…UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA (effective August 1, 2025). A pro se litigant may only obtain access to e-filing with a showing of good cause. See Fischer v. Dist. Sch. Bd. of Collier Cnty., No. 2:10-cv-512-FtM-29SPC, 2010 WL 3522215, at *1 (M.D. Fla. Sept. 7, 2010); Gerow v. Blackwell, No. 8:24-CV-02280-KKM-NHA, 2024 WL 4679030 (M.D. Fla. Nov. 5, 2024). ---PAGE 2--- Case 6:25-cv-02006-WWB-NWH Document 9 Filed 10/28/25 Page 2 of 2 PageID 31 Here, Plaintiff has not identified a…1 / 2
-
Costa Soares v. United States Dep't of State (M.D. Fla. 2024)…to use that system for filing purposes. The Court seldom allows pro se litigants to utilize its CM/ECF system. See Administrative Procedures for Electronic Filing § B(5) (2022); see also Fischer v. Dist. Sch. Bd. Of Collier Cnty., No. 2:10-cv- 512, 2010 WL 3522215, at *1 (M.D. Fla. Sept. 7, 2010). Plaintiff also does not need access to the cm/ecf system to file documents with the Court electronically. Plaintiff may use (and has used) the Court's e-Portal system to file documents. In pursuing this action, the…
Authorities Cited
- Owens v. Colonial Imports, Ltd., 2010 WL 3522215 (M.D. Fla. 2025)