Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_20-cv-00639/USCOURTS-caed-1_20-cv-00639-2/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

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

GARLAND A. JONES,

Plaintiff,

v.

RICHARDS, et al.,

Defendants.

Case No. 1:20-cv-00639-SKO (PC) 

FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 

TO DENY PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO 

PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS AND 

DISMISS ACTION

(Doc. 7)

14-DAY DEADLINE

Clerk of the Court to Assign a District Judge 

Plaintiff Garland A. Jones, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, initiated this civil rights 

action on April 3, 2020. (Doc. 1.) Before the Court is Plaintiff’s application to proceed in forma 

pauperis pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915. (Doc. 7.) Because Plaintiff has three “strikes” under 

section 1915(g) and fails to show that he is in imminent danger of serious physical injury, the 

Court recommends that his application be denied and this action dismissed without prejudice.

I. THREE-STRIKES PROVISION OF 28 U.S.C. § 1915 

28 U.S.C. § 1915 governs in forma pauperis proceedings. The statute provides, “[i]n no 

event shall a prisoner bring a civil action ... under this section if the prisoner has, on 3 or more 

prior 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 

Case 1:20-cv-00639-DAD-SKO Document 12 Filed 05/29/20 Page 1 of 3
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

2

of serious physical injury.” 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). 

II. DISCUSSION

The Court takes judicial notice of three of Plaintiff’s prior actions that were dismissed 

because they failed to state a claim on which relief can be granted1: (1) Jones v. Tolson, et al., No. 

1:15-cv-01037-JDP (E.D. Cal.) (dismissed on September 14, 2015, for failure to state a claim); 

(2) Jones v. Mailroom Officials, et al., No. 1:17-cv-00281-LJO-SKO (E.D. Cal) (dismissed on 

January 9, 2019, for failure to state a claim); (3) Jones v. California Correctional Healthcare 

Services, et al., No. 2:17-cv-00738-WBS-DB (E.D. Cal) (dismissed on April 26, 2019, for failure 

to state a claim). All of these cases were dismissed before Plaintiff initiated the current action on

April 3, 2020. Plaintiff is therefore precluded from proceeding in forma pauperis unless, at the 

time he filed his complaint, he was under imminent danger of serious physical injury. See 

Andrews v. Cervantes, 493 F.3d 1047, 1052-53 (9th Cir. 2007).

Plaintiff alleges the defendants failed to prevent his transfer to R.J. Donavan Correctional 

Facility despite “inmates with predatory behavior chronos” and “harassment by inmates and 

staff,” including staff’s issuance of “fraudulent RVRs.” (Doc. 1 at 3.) Plaintiff requests that the 

Court order prison staff to stop issuing false RVRs and halt all “mail violations.” (See id.) These 

allegations fail to show that Plaintiff is in imminent danger of serious physical injury.

III. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Based on the foregoing, the Court RECOMMENDS that:

1. Plaintiff’s motion to proceed in forma pauperis (Doc. 7) be DENIED; and,

2. This action be DISMISSED without prejudice to refiling upon prepayment of the 

filing fee.

The Clerk of the Court is DIRECTED to assign a district judge to this action.

These Findings and Recommendations will be submitted to the United States District 

Judge assigned to this case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within 14 days

of the date of service of these Findings and Recommendations, Plaintiff may file written 

objections with the Court. The document should be captioned, “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s 

 

1 The Court may take judicial notice of court records. United States v. Wilson, 631 F.2d 118, 119 (9th Cir. 1980).

Case 1:20-cv-00639-DAD-SKO Document 12 Filed 05/29/20 Page 2 of 3
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

3

Findings and Recommendations.” Plaintiff’s failure to file objections within the specified time 

may result in waiver of his rights on appeal. Wilkerson v. Wheeler, 772 F.3d 834, 839 (9th Cir. 

2014) (citing Baxter v. Sullivan, 923 F.2d 1391, 1394 (9th Cir. 1991)).

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: May 28, 2020 /s/ Sheila K. Oberto .

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:20-cv-00639-DAD-SKO Document 12 Filed 05/29/20 Page 3 of 3