Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_16-cv-01041/USCOURTS-caed-2_16-cv-01041-1/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 

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

DAVID SAMPSON HUNTER, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

KARA KALWINDER, et al., 

Defendants. 

No. 2:16-cv-1041-EFB P 

ORDER 

Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding without counsel in an action brought under 42 

U.S.C. § 1983.1

 He seeks leave to proceed in forma pauperis. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a). For the 

reasons explained below, the court finds that plaintiff has not demonstrated he is eligible to 

proceed in forma pauperis. 

A prisoner may not proceed in forma pauperis: 

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 of 

serious physical injury. 

28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). Court records reflect that plaintiff has been designated a three-strikes 

 1

 This proceeding was referred to this court by Local Rule 302 pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 

§ 636(b)(1) and is before the undersigned pursuant to plaintiff’s consent. See E.D. Cal. Local 

Rules, Appx. A, at (k)(4). 

Case 2:16-cv-01041-EFB Document 19 Filed 01/25/17 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

litigant for purposes of § 1915(g). See Hunter v. Paetzold, No. 5:14-cv-3233-PDG (Dec. 4, 2014, 

N.D. Cal.). The section 1915(g) exception applies if the complaint makes a plausible allegation 

that the prisoner faced “imminent danger of serious physical injury” at the time of filing. 28 

U.S.C. § 1915(g); Andrews v. Cervantes, 493 F.3d 1047, 1055 (9th Cir. 2007). For the exception 

to apply, the court must look to the conditions the “prisoner faced at the time the complaint was 

filed, not at some earlier or later time.” Andrews, 493 F.3d at 1053, 1056 (requiring that prisoner 

allege “an ongoing danger” to satisfy the imminency requirement). Courts need “not make an 

overly detailed inquiry into whether the allegations qualify for the exception.” Id. at 1055. 

According to the complaint and its exhibits, a doctor told plaintiff in December 2015 that 

he does not have a prostate infection, took a urine sample and a blood draw, and referred plaintiff 

for an ultrasound. ECF No. 1 at 8-9. 2 Plaintiff alleges that the doctor “failed to respond 

reasonably to treat plaintiff’s prostate infection.” Id. at 4. These allegations demonstrate a 

difference of opinion between plaintiff and his medical provider. They do not demonstrate that 

plaintiff suffered from an ongoing or imminent danger of serious physical injury at the time he 

filed his complaint. Thus, the imminent danger exception does not apply. 

In addition, plaintiff’s claims of “imminent danger,” filed three months after the complaint 

and concerning events that post-date the complaint, are not relevant to the section 1915(g) 

analysis. See ECF Nos. 13 & 14. 

Plaintiff’s application for leave to proceed in forma pauperis must therefore be denied 

pursuant to § 1915(g). Plaintiff must submit the appropriate filing fee in order to proceed with 

this action. 

 Accordingly, because plaintiff has not paid the filing fee and cannot proceed in forma 

pauperis, it is hereby ORDERED that: 

1. Plaintiff’s application to proceed in forma pauperis (ECF Nos. 2 & 10) is denied; and 

///// 

///// 

 2

 This and subsequent page number citations to plaintiff’s complaint are to the page 

number reflected on the court’s CM/ECF system and not to page numbers assigned by plaintiff. 

Case 2:16-cv-01041-EFB Document 19 Filed 01/25/17 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

2. Plaintiff shall submit, within twenty-one days from the date of this order, the 

appropriate filing fee. Plaintiff’s failure to comply with this order will result in the dismissal of 

this action. 

Dated: January 25, 2017. 

Case 2:16-cv-01041-EFB Document 19 Filed 01/25/17 Page 3 of 3