ORDER DENYING MOTION TO FILE ELECTRONICALLY

KAREN E. SCHREIER, District Judge.

Defendant, Holli Lundahl, appearing pro se, moves for permission to submit electronic filings in the Case Management/Electronic Case Filing (CM/ECF) system. Docket 24. Under this court's local rules, "[d]ocuments filed by . . . pro se parties are filed by delivering the original to the clerk within 14 days after service on the opposing party or parties." D.S.D. Crim. LR 49.1(B)(2)(b). Lundahl's motion requests the court make an exception for her in thiscase.

In considering the request to electronically file, the court reviewed Lundahl's filing activity in other cases in this district. The court finds Lundahl's filing practice was abusive of the judicial process. For example, Lundahl was previously granted permission to file in CM/ECF and filed briefs violating this court's local rule on length of briefs, D.S.D. Civ. LR. 7.1(B)(1). See, e.g., Telford v. Dep't of Housing & Urban Development, et. al., 3:16-CIV-3033. Subsequent to these violations, Lundahl was denied permission to file electronically. See Lundahl v. JP Morgan Chase Bank, et. al., 5:17-CV-05069 at Docket 18 (denying Lundahl's request to file electronically); Lundahl v. Gross, et. al., 5:18-CV-05090 at Docket 22 (denying Lundahl's request to file electronically); Telford v. Bradeen, et. al., 5:17-05042 at Docket 10 (denying Telford's request to file electronically). After considering Lundahl's other litigation in this district, the court denies Lundahl's motion to file in CM/ECF for this case. Thus, it is

ORDERED that Lundahl's motion to file electronically (Docket 24) is denied.