Pickett v. LexisNexis Risk Solutions Incorporated 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
Richard L Pickett,
Plaintiff,
v.
LexisNexis Risk Solutions Incorporated, et
al.,
Defendants.
No. CV-26-00159-PHX-KML
ORDER
Plaintiff Richard L. Pickett was granted leave to proceed in forma pauperis and he
now seeks an exemption from PACER fees. (Docs. 6, 11.) Pickett argues he has limited
financial resources and PACER fees impose “an undue financial burden” on him that will
impair his ability to litigate this case. (Doc. 11 at 2.)
“The fact that a party was granted in forma pauperis status is insufficient on its own
to establish that an exemption [from PACER fees] is necessary.” Altamirano v. Arizona
Bd. of Regents, No. CV-25-02257-PHX-JJT, 2026 WL 509096, at *1 (D. Ariz. Feb. 24,
2026). Pickett is already entitled to “one free electronic copy of all documents filed
electronically and free viewing of judicial opinions.” Id. In addition, “[t]he first $30.00 of
PACER access over a quarterly billing cycle is free.” Id. Pickett has not established how
his ability to litigate this case will be hampered given his current ability to access for free
the filings in this case and up to $30.00 of other filings.
/
/
Case 2:26-cv-00159-KML Document 12 Filed 03/26/26 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
Accordingly,
IT IS ORDERED the Motion for Exemption (Doc. 11) is DENIED.
Dated this 26th day of March, 2026.
Case 2:26-cv-00159-KML Document 12 Filed 03/26/26 Page 2 of 2