Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_06-cv-00451/USCOURTS-caed-2_06-cv-00451-7/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 550
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Civil Rights (U.S. defendant)
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Prisoner Civil Rights

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SONNY RAY HARDAWAY,

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-06-00451 ALA P

vs.

D.L. RUNNELS, et al.,

Defendants. ORDER DISMISSING ACTION WITHOUT 

PREJUDICE

ORDER THAT THIS DISMISSAL COUNTS AS 

A STRIKE PURSUANT TO 28 U.S.C. § 1915(G)

 /

Plaintiff Sonny Ray Hardaway, a state prisoner, is proceeding pro se and in forma

pauperis with this 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action. Defendants Baker and Kissinger filed a motion to

dismiss on the ground that, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g), Mr. Hardaway is barred from

proceeding in forma pauperis because he has had at least three prior actions dismissed as

frivolous or for failure to state a claim. Defendants also filed a request for judicial notice of

nineteen other cases in which Mr. Hardaway was the plaintiff. Mr. Hardaway filed an opposition

to Defendants’ motion.

I

28 U.S.C. § 1915 governs proceedings in forma pauperis. Section 1915(g) provides:

In no event shall a prisoner bring a civil action or appeal a judgment in a civil

action or proceeding under this section if the prisoner has, on 3 or more prior

Case 2:06-cv-00451-ALA Document 24 Filed 11/09/07 Page 1 of 4
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

1

This Court takes judicial notices of these cases. See F. Rule Evid. 210(b) ("A judicially

noticed fact must be one not subject to reasonable dispute in that it is either (1) generally known

within the territorial jurisdiction of the trial court or (2) capable of accurate and ready

determination by resort to sources whose accuracy cannot reasonably be questioned."); see also 

 Bennett v. Medtronic, Inc., 285 F.3d 801, 803 n.2 (9th Cir. 2002) (“[W]e ‘may take notice of

proceedings in other courts, both within and without the federal judicial system, if those

proceedings have a direct relation to matters at issue.’”) (citations omitted); MGIC Indem. Corp.

v. Weisman, 803 F.2d 500, 504 (9th Cir. 1986) (“On a motion to dismiss, we may take judicial

notice of matters of public record outside the pleadings.”).

2

occasions, while incarcerated or detained in any facility, brought an action or

appeal in a court of the United States that was dismissed on the grounds that it is

frivolous, malicious, or fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted,

unless the prisoner is under imminent danger of serious physical injury.

Mr. Hardaway, as a prisoner, has had thirteen prior actions dismissed as frivolous or for failure

to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. Two of these cases were counted as strikes

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). These thirteen cases include:1

• Hardaway v. Olsen, 1:06-cv-01406-LJO-NEW PC (E.D. Cal.) (dismissed June 26, 2007,

ordering that the dismissal be counted as a strike pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g));

• Hardaway v. Access Securepak, et al., 1:07-cv-00254-OWW-SMS PC (E.D. Cal.)

(dismissed June 20, 2007, ordering that the dismissal be counted as a strike pursuant to

28 U.S.C. § 1915(g));

• Hardaway v. Lambden, et al., C 06-6578 JF (N.D. Cal.) (dismissed January 12, 2007);

• Hardaway v. Barni, et al., C 06-3637 JF (N.D. Cal.) (dismissed December 11, 2006);

• Hardaway v. Twelve Jurors, C 06-2983 JF (N.D. Cal.) (dismissed August 31, 2006);

• Hardaway v. State of California, 2:01-cv-00695-MCE-PAN PC (E.D. Cal.) (dismissed

August 9, 2006);

• Hardaway v. Wright, 2:01-cv-00958-GEB-DAD PC (E.D. Cal.) (dismissed July 22,

2006);

• Hardaway v. Money, 2:01-cv-00458-FCD-DAD PC (E.D. Cal.) (dismissed July 12,

2006);

• Hardaway v. Oakland Tribune, et al., C 05-0729 JF (N.D. Cal.) (dismissed April 27,

Case 2:06-cv-00451-ALA Document 24 Filed 11/09/07 Page 2 of 4
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

3

2005; also denying leave to proceed in forma pauperis pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g));

• Hardaway v. Beaupre, et al., C 00-4603 CAL (N.D. Cal.) (dismissed March 7, 2001);

• Hardaway v. Vens, C 00-3653 CAL (N.D. Cal.) (dismissed November 28, 2000);

• Hardaway v. Madigan, C 98-1989 FMS (N.D. Cal.) (dismissed May 19, 1998);

• Hardaway v. Prenate, et al., C 97-0451 FMS (N.D. Cal.) (dismissed February 7, 1997).

Mr. Hardaway also had one prior case dismissed pursuant to § 1915(g). See Hardaway v. Lewis,

1:07-cv-00792-OWW-SMS PC (E.D. Cal.) (finding that Mr. Hardaway was ineligible to proceed

in forma pauperis under § 1915(g) and dismissing the action on August 14, 2007). 

Because Mr. Hardaway has had, on more than three prior occasions, civil actions that

were dismissed as frivolous or for failure to state a claim, he is not entitled to proceed in forma

pauperis unless he alleges facts indicating that he is in imminent danger of serious physical

injury. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). In the complaint here, Mr. Hardaway alleges that Correctional

Officers Baker and Kissinger violated his state and federal constitutional rights when they

illegally searched his cell, read his mail, and took personal property, including photographs and

food. These allegations do not indicate an imminent threat of serious physical injury. Thus, Mr.

Hardaway is subject to § 1915(g) and is not entitled to proceed in forma pauperis in this action. 

Because Mr. Hardaway is ineligible to proceed, his case is dismissed without prejudice pursuant

to § 1915(g). See Tierney v. Kupers, 128 F.3d 1310, 1311 (9th Cir. 1997) (affirming dismissal of

prisoner’s § 1983 action without prejudice following denial of the in forma pauperis privilege

under § 1915(g)).

/////

/////

/////

/////

/////

/////

Case 2:06-cv-00451-ALA Document 24 Filed 11/09/07 Page 3 of 4
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

4

 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g), Mr. Hardaway is not entitled to proceed in forma

pauperis in this action;

2. This action is DISMISSED, without prejudice; and

3. This dismissal shall count as a strike pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g).

/////

DATED: November 8, 2007

 

/s/ Arthur L. Alarcón 

 UNITED STATES CIRCUIT JUDGE

Sitting by Designation

Case 2:06-cv-00451-ALA Document 24 Filed 11/09/07 Page 4 of 4