Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled July 15, 2026

Hashem v. Jessica A. McClung

Judge
James Oetken
Docket
1:26-cv-04220
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2

Counsel1 of record
DEFENDANT
Michael Adam Berg Office of The Attorney General(NYS)

Counsel of record per CourtListener. Firm names are approximate.

Civil ProcedurePro Se
In one sentence

In Ayman Hashem v. McClung, Judge Oetken granted Hashem a limited PACER fee exemption for this case, retroactive to May 20, 2026.

Who this affects

Ayman Hashem is affected by the exemption. It applies only to his PACER access to the electronic case files in this case and does not apply to other uses of PACER or other Southern District of New York cases.

What happened

In Ayman Hashem v. Jessica A. McClung, Ayman Hashem, who was representing himself, asked the court for an exemption from fees for accessing case records through PACER.

The court granted the request. The exemption covers Hashem’s access to the electronic case files in this Southern District of New York case and applies retroactively from May 20, 2026, through July 7, 2026. It does not cover other PACER uses or other cases, and the order prohibits selling or transferring data obtained through the exemption.

Judge J. Paul Oetken also said the exemption applies only to Hashem, may be revoked, and does not need to be mailed because Hashem had agreed to receive electronic notices.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
Hashem v. Jessica A. McClung · No. 1:26-cv-04220
Judge
James Oetken
Date
July 15, 2026

Background

On July 14, 2026, Ayman Hashem, the plaintiff, asked by email for a PACER fee exemption. PACER is the federal court system used to access electronic docket entries and case documents. The order states that PACER generally charges users 10 cents per page, subject to a maximum of 30 pages, but that the fee schedule includes automatic exemptions for certain users, including parties proceeding without lawyers in some circumstances.

Ruling

The court found that Hashem was a party in the case and was proceeding without a lawyer. It therefore found that he was eligible for an automatic PACER fee exemption and granted his request.

The exemption covers only Hashem’s access through PACER to the electronic case files maintained by the Southern District of New York for this case. It does not cover other uses of PACER in that court or any other Southern District of New York cases. The order also states that Hashem may not sell for profit or transfer—including by distributing through internet-based databases—data obtained under the exemption.

The exemption applies retroactively from May 20, 2026, the date the complaint was filed, through July 7, 2026, the date the case was closed. The court stated that it may revoke the exemption at any time and directed the Clerk of Court to send the order to the PACER Service Center. Because Hashem had previously consented to electronic notice, the court found that a mailed copy was unnecessary.

Disposition and Classification

Judge J. Paul Oetken granted Hashem’s request for a PACER fee exemption. This is a procedural order because it concerns an ancillary court-access fee and does not decide the underlying claims in the case.

The authoritative version

Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.