Santaniello-Townsend v. Arizona Healthcare Cost Containment System et al

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
WO
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA
Theresa Angela Santaniello-Townsend,
Plaintiff,
v.
Arizona Healthcare Cost Containment
System, et al.,
Defendants.
No. CV-25-00583-TUC-RCC
ORDER
Before the Court is Plaintiff’s Motion for Plaintiff’s Leave to Proceed In Forma
Pauperis PACER Fee Exemption. (Doc. 97.) Plaintiff claims she needs free “PACER
access to review filings, upload filings, monitor the docket, and comply with court orders
and deadlines.” (Id. at 2.) She also claims that paying PACER fees causes undue financial
hardship. (Id.)
“[T]he in forma pauperis statute does not provide that a court may exempt a litigant
from fees associated with PACER.” Luehring v. Los Angeles Cnty., No. 2:21-CV-01426-
GW-SHK, 2021 WL 4533275, at *1 (C.D. Cal. Aug. 4, 2021) (citing 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)).
And so, “[i]n forma pauperis status alone does not support a request to waive PACER fees.”
Katumbusi v. Gary, No. 2:14-CV-1534 JAM AC, 2014 WL 5698816, at *4 (E.D. Cal. Oct.
30, 2014); see also Oliva v. Brookwood Coram I, LLC, No. 14-CV-2513 (JMA)(AYS),
2015 WL 1966357, at *1-2 (E.D.N.Y. Apr. 30, 2015) (“[A] party seeking a discretionary
exemption [of PACER fees] cannot rely on his in forma pauperis status alone.” (quotations
and citations omitted)).
Case 4:25-cv-00583-RCC Document 103 Filed 04/24/26 Page 1 of 2

- 2 -
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
The Court is cognizant of Plaintiff’s IFP status, current housing difficulties, and
financial strain. However, in several instances the use of PACER is free. Parties may
receive free notices of docket activity and court opinions and may access PACER for free
from any federal courthouse. https://pacer.uscourts.gov/pacer-pricing-how-fees-work (last
visited April 23, 2026). Plaintiff may receive one free electronic copy of all documents
filed in her case. “Plaintiff’s Motion does not suggest any reason why he should be
exempted from payment of PACER fees other than Plaintiff’s desire to avoid paying fees.”
Luehring, 2021 WL 4533275, at *2.
IT IS ORDERED DENYING Plaintiff’s Motion for Leave to Proceed In Forma
Pauperis Pacer Fee Exemption without prejudice. (Doc. 97.)
Dated this 24th day of April, 2026.
Case 4:25-cv-00583-RCC Document 103 Filed 04/24/26 Page 2 of 2