Cowan v. State of Nebraska et al

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEBRASKA
LATAWNYA COWAN,
Plaintiff,
vs.
STATE OF NEBRASKA, SHANNON
GROTRIAN, Director, Office of
Economic Assistance, Individual and
Official capacity; and JENNIFER
LLOYD, Case Worker, Individual and
Official capacity;
Defendants.
8:25CV163
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court on a request for accommodation from
Plaintiff LaTawnya Cowan received via e-mail to the Clerk of the Court.
Plaintiff asks that she be permitted to e-mail documents to the Court for
filing due to her disability and because the Public Access to Court Electronic
Records (“PACER”) website is not accessible to her. For the reasons that
follow, the Court will deny Plaintiff’s request, will remove her electronic filing
access, and will require her to submit filings via the U.S. mail.
I. BACKGROUND
The Court sets out the following background, which is helpful in
evaluating Plaintiff’s request. Plaintiff filed her Complaint, Filing No. 1, and
a motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis, Filing No. 2, on March 3,
2025, by mailing her documents to the Court, see Filing No. 1 at 8. Plaintiff
requested and was granted electronic filing access on March 27, 2025. See
Docket Sheet (Public Remark dated Mar. 27, 2025). On May 1, 2025, Plaintiff
filed a motion to amend by mailing the document to the Court. See Filing No.
8:25-cv-00163-JMG-PRSE Doc # 11 Filed: 11/18/25 Page 1 of 7 - Page ID #
<pageID>

2
6 at 4. On October 21, 2025, the Court conducted an initial review of the
Complaint and the allegations in Plaintiff’s motion to amend, determined
that Plaintiff’s Complaint failed to state a claim upon which relief may be
granted, and gave Plaintiff 30 days to file an amended complaint. Filing No.
7. The Clerk of the Court sent a copy of the initial review order to Plaintiff at
her e-mail address on file with the Court and it was returned to this Court as
undeliverable. See Filing No. 8. The Clerk of the Court also attempted to
contact Plaintiff via telephone, but all phone numbers previously provided by
Plaintiff were invalid. Additionally, the Clerk of the Court sent an e-mail to
an alternative e-mail address provided by Plaintiff in her Complaint, see
Filing No. 1 at 1, and received an unsigned response that Plaintiff is
deceased. On October 27, 2025, the Court ordered Plaintiff to update her
contact information, including her e-mail, mailing address, and phone
number, within 30 days or face dismissal of this action without further
notice. Filing No. 9.
On November 7, 2025, the Clerk of the Court received an e-mail
purporting to be from Plaintiff indicating her e-mails had been hacked,
providing an updated e-mail address, and asking for forms and to file
documents by e-mail. Plaintiff was instructed to update her e-mail address
via the PACER website if she wished to receive filing notices via e-mail and
to file documents electronically, and she was also informed the Court did not
have the forms she requested. On November 10, 2025, Plaintiff again e-
mailed from the updated e-mail address and asked that she be permitted to
file her documents via e-mail because she could not access the PACER
website due to her disability. Plaintiff states she is blind and visually
impaired.
8:25-cv-00163-JMG-PRSE Doc # 11 Filed: 11/18/25 Page 2 of 7 - Page ID #
<pageID>

3
A search of PACER shows that Plaintiff has filed 15 civil cases in 2025,
including two cases in this district, five in the Southern or Eastern Districts
of California, three in the Eastern or Western Districts of Missouri, two in
the District of Colorado, two in the District of Kansas, and one in the District
of Columbia,1 and two of those fifteen cases were transferred to another
district.2 In all but one of the cases, Plaintiff filed paper documents and did
not file documents electronically or by e-mail.
II. DISCUSSION
Plaintiff seeks to file future documents in this case by e-mailing them
to the Court. However, allowing Plaintiff to do so would be contrary to the
Court’s established procedures and requirements for electronically filing
documents with the Court. Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure
5(d)(3)(B), “[a] person not represented by an attorney: (i) may file
electronically only if allowed by court order or by local rule; and (ii) may be
required to file electronically only by court order, or by a local rule that
includes reasonable exceptions.” This Court’s local rules permit pro se parties
to use the Court’s electronic case filing (“CM/ECF”) system (“System”) by
registering with the PACER system. See NEGenR 1.3(b)(1). Moreover, as
defined by the Court’s local rules, “‘[e]lectronic filing’ or ‘electronically file’
means uploading a document directly from a registered user’s computer,
1 See Cowan v. State of Cal. Dep’t of Soc. Servs., No. 2:25-cv-00697 (E.D. Cal. 2025); Cowan v. U.S.
Dep’t of Health & Hum. Servs., No. 2:25-cv-01170 (E.D. Cal. 2025); Cowan v. San Diego Cnty., No.
3:25-cv-00342 (S.D. Cal. 2025); Cowan v. San Diego Cnty., No. 3:25-cv-00697 (S.D. Cal. 2025); Cowan
v. U.S. Dep’t of health and human servs., No. 3:25-cv-00967 (S.D. Cal. 2025); Cowan v. Col. Springs
Hous. Auth., No. 1:25-cv-00676 (D. Colo. 2025); Cowan v. State of Colo., No. 1:25-cv-00816 (D. Colo.
2025); Cowan v. U.S. Dep’t of Ag., No. 1:25-cv-01081 (D.D.C. 2025); Cowan v. KVC Behav.
Healthcare, Inc., No. 5:25-cv-04035 (D. Kan. 2025); Cowan v. U.S. Dep’t of Hous. & Urb. Dev., No.
5:25-cv-04039 (D. Kan. 2025); Cowan v. Mo. Dep’t of Soc. Servs., No. 4:25-cv-00236 (E.D. Mo. 2025);
Cowan v. Wucher, No. 2:25-cv-04039 (W.D. Mo. 2025); Cowan v. State of Mo. Soc. Servs. and Rehab.
Servs. for the Blind, No. 2:25-cv-04084 (W.D. Mo. 2025); Cowan v. US Dep’t of Hous. & Urb. Dev., No.
8:25-cv-00339 (D. Neb. 2025).
2 See Cowan v. U.S. Dep’t of Health & Hum. Servs., No. 3:25-cv-02100 (S.D. Cal. 2025) (transferred
from E.D. Cal., No. 2:25-cv-01170); Cowan v. Mo. Dep’t of Soc. Servs., No. 2:25-cv-04046 (W.D. Mo.
2025) (transferred from E.D. Mo., No. 4:25-cv-00236).
8:25-cv-00163-JMG-PRSE Doc # 11 Filed: 11/18/25 Page 3 of 7 - Page ID #
<pageID>

4
using the court’s Internet-based System to file that document in the court’s
case file. . . . Sending a document to the court via electronic mail (e-mail) or
facsimile transmission (fax) is not electronic filing.” NEGenR 1.1(d)(5).
Moreover, “[a] document faxed or e-mailed to the clerk or assigned judge is
not considered filed without a court order.” NECivR 5.1(d). As a pro se
litigant, Plaintiff is “bound by and must comply with all local and federal
procedural rules.” NEGenR 1.3(g).
Here, Plaintiff has been granted access to the Court’s CM/ECF System
by registering with PACER shortly after she filed her Complaint. However,
the e-mail address Plaintiff used to register with PACER no longer appears
to be valid and an e-mail sent to the alternate e-mail address provided by
Plaintiff in her Complaint resulted in a response indicating Plaintiff is
deceased. Despite being able to initially register for electronic filing access
with PACER, Plaintiff now asserts that she cannot access the PACER
website due to her disability and cannot update her e-mail address via
PACER, and she asks that the Court allow her to e-mail documents for filing.
Upon consideration, the Court will deny Plaintiff’s requested e-mail
accommodation. As indicated above, the Court’s local rules do not generally
permit filing by e-mail. Plaintiff offers no explanation for why she is now
unable to access PACER to update her e-mail address when she was able to
initially register with PACER on her own. The Court also harbors concerns
about whether Plaintiff’s request to file via e-mail using her updated e-mail
address was actually sent by Plaintiff given her unexplained inability to now
access PACER and the e-mail from an address previously provided by
Plaintiff indicating that Plaintiff is deceased. At least if Plaintiff were to
update her e-mail address via PACER, the Court would have some assurance
that she was the same person who registered with PACER initially.
8:25-cv-00163-JMG-PRSE Doc # 11 Filed: 11/18/25 Page 4 of 7 - Page ID #
<pageID>

5
Additionally, because Plaintiff states she is unable to access PACER,
the Court finds that Plaintiff’s electronic filing access should be removed in
this case, and all future filings from Plaintiff and notices from the Court
should be paper documents sent via the U.S. mail.3 Plaintiff’s litigation
history demonstrates that she is able to file paper documents by mailing
them to this Court and that she is able to utilize paper filing systems in
general. As the District Court for the Eastern District of California found in
denying Plaintiff’s request to participate in electronic filing in that court,
[P]laintiff does not have regular access to a computer. ECF No 7
at 1 (“Plaintiff does not have a [sic] accessible computer and has
to pay a disability assistant, handicap transit, reader/scribe costs
to participate in the case as the library, court website and forms
are NOT accessible to the blind . . .”). It appears to the court that
neither email service nor electronic filing is not [sic] appropriate
in this case due to plaintiff’s lack of regular access to a computer.
Plaintiff has demonstrated her ability to use the paper filing
system by filing this case and by continuing to successfully file
motions.
Cowan v. State of Cal. Dep’t of Soc. Servs., No. 2:25-cv-00697 (E.D. Cal. May
2, 2025) (Document 9). The Court finds this reasoning applies equally here
and will require Plaintiff to file paper documents by mail to conform to the
Court’s local rules and to alleviate any concerns about the identity of the
party e-mailing the Court purportedly as Plaintiff. As such, Plaintiff is
hereby notified that the Court will not accept nor take any action on
any future e-mailed or faxed documents she submits for filing in this
case or otherwise. All future filings Plaintiff makes into this case must be
made via hand delivery or via United States postal mail.
3 As a one-time courtesy, the Court will send a copy of this Memorandum and Order to the e -mail
address Plaintiff used to send her accommodation request as well as to the mailing addresses the
Court has on file. However, all future notices will only be sent via U.S. mail.
8:25-cv-00163-JMG-PRSE Doc # 11 Filed: 11/18/25 Page 5 of 7 - Page ID #
<pageID>

6
Plaintiff is reminded that the Court has ordered her to file an amended
complaint and to update her current mailing address with the Court.4
Plaintiff must keep the Court informed of her current mailing address at all
times. See NEGenR 1.3(e) and (g) (requiring pro se parties to adhere to local
rules and inform the Court of address changes within 30 days). On its own
motion, the Court will extend the time Plaintiff has to amend her complaint
and to update her address to 30 days from the date of this order.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that:
1. Plaintiff’s request for an accommodation allowing her to e-mail
documents to the Court for filing is denied.
2. The Clerk of the Court is directed to terminate Plaintiff’s
electronic filing access in this case.
3. The Court will not accept nor take any action on any future e-
mailed or faxed documents Plaintiff submits for filing in this case or
otherwise. All future filings Plaintiff makes into this case must be made by
hand delivering the document to the Clerk of the Court or sending the
document via United States postal mail.
4. Plaintiff has until December 18, 2025, to (1) file an amended
complaint in accordance with the Court’s October 21, 2025, Memorandum
and Order, Filing No. 7, and (2) update her mailing address in accordance
with the Court’s October 27, 2025, Memorandum and Order, Filing No. 9.
Failure to do so will result in dismissal of this action without further notice to
Plaintiff.
5. The Clerk of the Court is directed to terminate the November 20,
2025, and November 26, 2025, pro se case management deadlines and to set a
4 Plaintiff was also ordered to update her address in Case No. 8:25-cv-00339. See Filing No. 6, Case
No. 8:25-cv-00339.
8:25-cv-00163-JMG-PRSE Doc # 11 Filed: 11/18/25 Page 6 of 7 - Page ID #
<pageID>

7
pro se case management deadline using the following text: December 18,
2025: deadline for Plaintiff to file amended complaint and update address.
6. The Clerk of the Court is directed to send a copy of this
Memorandum and Order and the Court’s October 21, 2025, Memorandum
and Order, Filing No. 7, to Plaintiff via e-mail at the e-mail address provided
in her November 7, 2025, e-mail to the Clerk and via U.S. mail to the
addresses on file in this case and in Case No. 8:25CV339.
Dated this 18th day of November, 2025.
BY THE COURT:
_________________________________
John M. Gerrard
Senior United States District Judge
8:25-cv-00163-JMG-PRSE Doc # 11 Filed: 11/18/25 Page 7 of 7 - Page ID #
<pageID>