ORDER

ERIN WILDER-DOOMES, Magistrate Judge.

Before the Court are Plaintiff's two (2) Motions for Order Allowing Plaintiff to Plead Via U.S. Mail (R. Docs. 31 and 41), Inasmuch as the two motions are essentially identical, the Court will only address the first-filed motion.

The basis for the instant motion is Plaintiff's contention that in late December, 2015 he submitted pleadings to the Legal Programs Department at the Louisiana State Penitentiary for scanning and electronic transmission to this Court for filing, but the pleadings were erroneously transmitted to the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana and were thereafter returned to him without filing. As a result of this occurrence, Plaintiff seeks leave of Court to submit all future pleadings to the Clerk of this Court by regular mail instead of by electronic submission. In the alternative, Plaintiff requests that the Court order that prison officials electronically scan and transmit the envelopes Plaintiff uses as proof that he has provided an appropriate addressee for his pleadings and submissions.

Plaintiff's request shall be denied. Pursuant to General Order of this Court, all pleadings submitted for filing by inmates confined at the Louisiana State Penitentiary are submitted to prison officials for scanning and are then transmitted to the Court by electronic submission. The Court routinely receives a large volume of prisoner submissions in this manner and has experienced very few problems with this procedure. The erroneous transmission of Plaintiff's pleadings to the wrong court in late December, 2015 was clearly the result of mere inadvertence, and there is no indication that the error is likely to be repeated. Further, it does not appear that Plaintiff was prejudiced by the error inasmuch as he was subsequently able to transmit and file the subject pleadings in this Court. In the event that the error recurs, Plaintiff will have an opportunity to show the Court, through prison mail logs, electronic records or other documentation, that he has attempted to forward his pleadings to the Court in a timely and correct manner. Accordingly,

IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiff's first-filed and duplicative second-filed Motion for Order Allowing Plaintiff to Plead Via U.S. Mail (R. Docs. 31 and 41) are hereby DENIED.