Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_16-cv-00293/USCOURTS-caed-1_16-cv-00293-2/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

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

27

28

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Plaintiff Stewart Manago is proceeding pro se in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 

1983 filed on March 3, 2016. 

 On March 9, 2016, the magistrate judge issued Findings and Recommendations denying 

Plaintiff’s application to proceed in forma pauperis because Plaintiff has suffered three or more strikes 

under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g), and Plaintiff failed to demonstrate he was in imminent danger. (ECF No. 

3.) The Findings and Recommendations were adopted in full on March 30, 2016, and Plaintiff was 

directed to pay the $400.00 filing fee within thirty days or the action would be dismissed. (ECF No. 

5.) The thirty day time frame has expired and Plaintiff has not paid the filing fee. However, on April 

11, 2016, Plaintiff filed a motion for relief from the March 30, 2016, order, along with a first amended 

complaint. (ECF Nos. 6 & 7.) The Court has reviewed Plaintiff’s first amended complaint, filed April 

11, 2016, and it suffers from the same defects as the original complaint. (ECF No. 7.) Plaintiff 

references only vague and past incidents of retaliation and failure to protect him from potential future 

STEWART MANAGO,

 Plaintiff,

v.

JEFFREY A. BEARD, et al.,

Defendants.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Case No.: 1:16-cv-00293-LJO-SAB (PC)

ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR 

RELIEF AND DISMISSING ACTION, WITHOUT 

PREJUDICE, FOR FAILURE TO PAY FILING 

FEE

[ECF Nos. 6 & 7]

Case 1:16-cv-00293-LJO-SAB Document 8 Filed 05/05/16 Page 1 of 2
2

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

27

28

harm. (Id.) Indeed, as stated in the Findings and Recommendations, Plaintiff’s claims of failure to 

protect are vague and conclusory and devoid of sufficient factual support. There are no allegations 

that Plaintiff is presently in imminent danger of physical harm, and Plaintiff makes no request for 

relief from imminent danger and requests only monetary damages. Accordingly, Plaintiff is ineligible 

to proceed in forma pauperis in this action. Therefore, this case must be dismissed, without prejudice, 

for failure to pay the filing fee. 

 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: May 4, 2016 /s/ Lawrence J. O’Neill _____ 

UNITED STATES CHIEF DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:16-cv-00293-LJO-SAB Document 8 Filed 05/05/16 Page 2 of 2