Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_07-cv-01873/USCOURTS-caed-1_07-cv-01873-2/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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

TONY BLACKMAN,

Plaintiff, 1:07 CV 01873 AWI YNP GSA (PC)

vs. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION

LT. R. PARIN, et al.,

Defendants.

Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se in a civil rights action challenging the

conditions of his confinement.

Plaintiff, an inmate in the custody of the California Department of Corrections and

Rehabilitation at Corcoran State Prison, brings this action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against

correctional officials employed by the CDCR at Corcoran State Prison. Plaintiff’s complaint sets

forth allegations that defendants have confiscated his written inmate appeals.

The Prison Litigation Reform Act provides that “[i]n no event shall a prisoner bring a

civil action . . . under this section if the prisoner has, on 3 or more occasions, while incarcerated

or detained in a facility, brought an action or appeal in a court of the United States that was

dismissed on the ground 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 injury.” 28 U.S.C. §

1915(g). 

1

Case 1:07-cv-01873-AWI-MJS Document 15 Filed 01/19/10 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

This plaintiff has, on 3 prior occasions, brought civil actions challenging the conditions of

his confinement. All three action were dismissed as frivolous, or for failure to state a claim upon

which relief can be granted. Blackman v. Harwell, et al., 99-5822 REC HGB P (E. Dist. Cal.);

Blackman v. Medina, 05-CV-05390-SI (N. Dist. Cal.); Blackman v. Variz , 06-CV 06398 SI (N.

Dist. Cal.). Plaintiff is therefore not entitled to proceed in forma pauperis unless he alleges

facts indicating that he is in imminent danger of serious physical injury. There are no such facts

alleged in complaint filed in this case. Accordingly, on October 16, 2009, an order to show cause

was entered, directing Plaintiff to show cause why he should not be denied leave to proceed in

forma pauperis. Plaintiff has not filed a response to the order to show cause.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that plaintiff’s request to proceed in

forma pauperis denied, and Plaintiff be directed to submit the $350 filing fee in full.

These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge

assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of Title 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Within thirty days

after being served with these findings and recommendations, any party may file written

objections with the court and serve a copy on all parties. Such a document should be captioned

“Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” Any reply to the objections

shall be served and filed within ten days after service of the objections. The parties are advised

that failure to file objections within the specified time waives all objections to the judge’s

findings of fact. See Turner v. Duncan, 158 F.3d 449, 455 (9 Cir. 1998). Failure to file th

objections within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order. 

Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9 Cir. 1991). th

2

Case 1:07-cv-01873-AWI-MJS Document 15 Filed 01/19/10 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

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated: January 15, 2010 /s/ Gary S. Austin 

6i0kij UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

3

Case 1:07-cv-01873-AWI-MJS Document 15 Filed 01/19/10 Page 3 of 3