Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_12-cv-02845/USCOURTS-caed-2_12-cv-02845-0/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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

LEON E. MORRIS, 

Plaintiff, No. 2: 12-cv-2845 LKK JFM (PC)

vs.

KEVIN DALY, et al.,

Defendants. ORDER

 /

Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se with an action for violation of civil

rights under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On November 20, 2012, plaintiff filed a motion to proceed in

forma pauperis. 

Title 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g) provides:

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

judgment in a civil action or proceeding [in forma pauperis] if the

prisoner has, on three or more 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.

On April 2, 2008, in a case brought by plaintiff in the United States District Court for the

Northern District of California, the court determined that plaintiff had “struck out” under §

1

Case 2:12-cv-02845-JAM-AC Document 6 Filed 01/30/13 Page 1 of 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

1915(g) and dismissed the case. See Morris v. Woodford, No. C. 07-4198, 2008 WL 906560

(N.D. Cal. Apr. 2, 2008). Plaintiff appealed the decision. On August 4, 2008, the Ninth Circuit

denied plaintiff’s request to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal without explanation and

ordered plaintiff to pay the filing fee. Plaintiff’s appeal was dismissed on September 4, 2008 for

failure to pay the filing fee and the mandate with respect to that decision was issued that day as

well. Accordingly, the decision that plaintiff had “struck out” under § 1915(g) was final well

before plaintiff brought this action in 2012. In his complaint, plaintiff asserts that the defendants

have interfered with his ability to file grievances against other “cohorts.” Plaintiff does not

suggest that he is under imminent danger of serious physical injury. 

In light of the foregoing, plaintiff’s motion to proceed in forma pauperis will be

denied and he will be ordered to pay the $350 filing fee for this action within twenty-one days. 

Plaintiff’s failure to pay the filing fee within twenty-one days will result in a recommendation

that this action be dismissed. 

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Plaintiff’s motion to proceed in forma paupers (Dkt. No. 2.) is DENIED; and

2. Plaintiff shall pay the $350 filing fee for this action within twenty-one (21)

days. Failure to pay the filing fee within twenty-one days will result in a recommendation that

this action be dismissed without prejudice. 

DATED: January 29, 2013

14

morr2845.3strikeifp

2

Case 2:12-cv-02845-JAM-AC Document 6 Filed 01/30/13 Page 2 of 2