Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_09-cv-00919/USCOURTS-caed-1_09-cv-00919-0/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

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

BRYAN DAVIS,

Plaintiff,

v.

CITY OF FRESNO, et al.,

Defendants.

 /

CASE NO. 1:09-cv-00919-MJS- PC

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY PLAINTIFF’S

IN FORMA PAUPERIS STATUS SHOULD NOT

BE REVOKED PURSUANT TO 28 U.S.C. §

1915(G). 

(Doc. 1)

RESPONSE DUE IN THIRTY DAYS

Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se in a civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §

1983. Plaintiff has consented to magistrate judge jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c)(1).

This action proceeds on the original complaint filed on May 26, 2009. 

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

Rehabilitation at Salinas Valley State Prison, brings this civil rights action against various

correctional officials, a Deputy Attorney General, and the City of Fresno. Plaintiff also names

judicial officers of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California in Fresno. Plaintiff

alleges that he has been subjected to a “criminal corruption conspiracy” for eleven years. Plaintiff

makes vague allegations regarding his underlying criminal conviction (an illegal confession), as well

as allegations regarding the dismissal of a civil suit.

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

Case 1:09-cv-00919-MJS Document 10 Filed 06/08/10 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

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.” 

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

of his confinement. Davis v. Jordin, 1:07 cv 00302 LJO DLB PC (East. Dist. Cal., March 13,

2009)(dismissed for failure to state a claim upon which relief could be granted); Davis v City of San

Diego, 08-1456 H (LSP)(So. Dist. Cal., September 10, 2008)(dismissed for failure to state a claim

upon which relief could be granted); Davis v. Garcia, 07-0140 BEN (POR)(So. Dist. Cal., August

10, 2007)(dismissed as frivolous). Plaintiff is therefore not entitled to proceed in forma pauperis

unless he alleges facts that he is in imminent danger of serious injury. There are no such facts

alleged in this case.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff shall show cause, within thirty days

of the date of service of this order, why his in forma pauperis status should not be revoked pursuant

to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g), and plaintiff be directed to pay the $350 filing fee in full. Plaintiff’s failure

to respond to this order to show cause will result in dismissal of this action for plaintiff’s failure to

obey a court order pursuant to Local Rule 11-110.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: June 7, 2010 /s/Michael J. Seng 

ci4d6 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:09-cv-00919-MJS Document 10 Filed 06/08/10 Page 2 of 2