Graham v. Dr. James Koenig and Kathy Reid
- Laura Provinzino
- 0:23-cv-00263
- U.S. District Court · District of Minnesota
- 4
In Graham v. Dr. James Koenig and Kathy Reid, Judge Provinzino granted prisoner Alonzo J. Graham's request for a 30-day extension to file his notice of appeal and granted his requests for free copies of his own court filings to assist with that appeal.
Pro se prisoner-litigants seeking to appeal dismissals of their civil cases, particularly those who face mail or access-to-legal-materials delays and cannot afford copying fees.
What happened
In Graham v. Dr. James Koenig and Kathy Reid (Case No. 23-cv-263), the underlying civil claims brought by Alonzo J. Graham, a prisoner at the Minnesota Correctional Facility in Rush City, were dismissed with prejudice on September 30, 2025. Graham then filed three motions: one seeking more time to file a notice of appeal with the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals, and two seeking free copies of documents he filed in the case that he says he needs to pursue his appeal.
Graham asked for more time primarily because he has experienced significant delays in receiving legal materials — including a copy of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure and legal decisions — from the Minnesota State Law Library, which he said takes a minimum of two to three weeks due to mail delivery problems. The court found this explanation plausible based on a record showing repeated mail delays throughout the case. Graham also stated he is unable to pay copying fees and needs the documents — all of which appear to be handwritten originals he sent to the court — to support his appeal.
Judge Provinzino granted all three motions. The deadline for Graham to file his notice of appeal was extended by 30 days, through November 30, 2025 (with a note that because that date falls on a Sunday, the actual deadline is Monday, December 1, 2025). The court also ordered the Clerk of Court to mail Graham free copies of the seven specific filings he identified, finding it in the interest of fairness to ensure he has those documents for his appeal.
The detailed version
This order addresses three post-judgment motions filed by pro se (self-represented) plaintiff Alonzo J. Graham following the dismissal with prejudice of his civil claims on September 30, 2025. The underlying case involved claims against Dr. James Koenig and Kathy Reid. After judgment was entered (ECF No. 257), Graham filed: (1) a motion for an extension of time to file a notice of appeal (ECF No. 259); and (2) two motions for free copies of court documents (ECF Nos. 258, 260).
Extension of Appeal Deadline
Under Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 4(a)(5), a district court may extend the time to file a notice of appeal if the motion is filed within 30 days of the original deadline and the movant demonstrates excusable neglect or good cause. Graham's original deadline to file a notice of appeal was October 30, 2025, and he filed his extension motion on October 27, 2025, making it timely. The court applied the equitable multi-factor test from Gibbons v. United States, 317 F.3d 852 (8th Cir. 2003), focusing primarily on the nature, credibility, and persuasiveness of the reason for delay. Graham cited delays in receiving materials from the Minnesota State Law Library, attributing them to mail delivery problems. The court found this plausible given documented mail delays in the case record (ECF Nos. 63, 244). The court noted but set aside Graham's unsubstantiated allegation of intentional interference with his legal mail. The court granted the maximum 30-day extension permitted under Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(5)(C), extending the deadline to November 30, 2025, with a practical note that because that date is a Sunday, the deadline under Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(a)(C) runs to Monday, December 1, 2025.
Free Copies of Court Documents
Graham, who is indigent (unable to afford court costs), requested free copies of seven of his own filings: a motion in limine (ECF No. 249), two supporting declarations (ECF Nos. 250–51), a letter to the court (ECF No. 252), a certificate of service (ECF No. 253), his objections to the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation (ECF No. 254), and supporting exhibits (ECF No. 255). The court noted these appear to be the handwritten originals Graham submitted and that he likely could not retain copies before sending them. In the interest of ensuring Graham can meaningfully pursue his appeal, the court granted the requests and directed the Clerk of Court to mail copies of those seven documents, along with a copy of the docket sheet, to Graham at his address of record.
Ruling Summary
All three motions were granted. The appeal deadline is extended to December 1, 2025 (accounting for the Sunday rule). The Clerk of Court is directed to mail the specified documents to Graham.
Reviewer note from the AI+
Read the full 4-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.