Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_24-cv-01029/USCOURTS-caed-1_24-cv-01029-0/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

27

28

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

KEITH JEROME WRIGHT,

Plaintiff,

v.

ZALDIVAR-GALVES,

Defendant.

No. 1:24-cv-01029 GSA (PC)

ORDER RELATING THIS MATTER TO 

WRIGHT v. RODRIGUEZ, No. 1:23-cv-01586 

GSA IN LIGHT OF 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g)

See Local Rule 123(a)(3)-(4)

ORDER DIRECTING CLERK OF COURT TO 

UPDATE CASE CAPTION OF DOCKET IN 

EACH CASE TO REFLECT RELATION OF 

MATTERS

Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, has filed this civil 

rights action seeking relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred to a United States 

Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302.

For the reasons stated below, the Court will relate this matter to Wright v. Rodriguez, No. 

1:23-cv-01586 (“Wright I”). As a result, the undersigned will direct the Clerk of Court to update 

the dockets in both these matters accordingly.

I. BACKGROUND

On August 29, 2024, Plaintiff’s complaint was docketed along with Plaintiff’s application 

to proceed in forma pauperis. ECF Nos. 1, 2. On the same day, the Court directed Plaintiff to file 

a six-month prisoner trust fund account statement. ECF No. 4. As of August 30, 2024, Plaintiff’s 

Case 1:24-cv-01029-JLT-GSA Document 6 Filed 09/03/24 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

27

28

2

trust fund account statement has not been filed. A cursory review of all Plaintiff’s filings in this 

Court indicates that Plaintiff appears to be a three strikes litigant within the meaning of 28 U.S.C. 

§ 1915(g).

II. DISCUSSION

A comparison of this case with Wright I reveals that it is related to Wright I within the 

meaning of Local Rule 123. Specifically, both the instant matter and Wright I address the same 

questions of fact and law related to whether Plaintiff is a three strikes litigant within the meaning 

of 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g) and whether, as a result, he should first be required to pay the filing fees 

in full for both matters prior to proceeding any further in them. For this reason, the Court will 

order that both cases be related. See Local Rule 123(a)(3)-(4). Relating these cases will merely 

result in both actions being assigned to the same judges. It will not consolidate the two actions.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Consistent with Local Rule 123(a)(3)-(4), this matter is RELATED to Wright v. 

Rodriguez, No. 1:23-cv-01586 GSA on the issue of whether Plaintiff is a three strikes litigant. 

See generally 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g), and

2. The Clerk of Court is directed to UPDATE the case caption of the docket both in this 

case and in Wright v. Rodriguez, No. 1:23-cv-01586 GSA to reflect the relation of these two 

matters to one another.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: September 2, 2024 /s/ Gary S. Austin 

 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:24-cv-01029-JLT-GSA Document 6 Filed 09/03/24 Page 2 of 2