Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_05-cv-00605/USCOURTS-caed-1_05-cv-00605-2/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

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

ISABEL TUBACH,

Plaintiff,

v.

JAQUEZ, et. al.,

Defendants.

 /

CV F 05 605 AWI SMS P 

FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS TO

DISMISS ACTION (Doc. 1.) 

Isabel Tubach (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se in this civil rights action

filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. 

Plaintiff filed the instant action on November 4, 2004, in the Sacramento Division of the

Eastern District of California. The Case was transferred to this District on May 5, 2005. 

Currently pending is an Application to Proceed In forma Pauperis filed with the original

complaint. The Court issued an Order requiring Plaintiff to submit a completed Application to

Proceed In Forma Pauperis on May 26, 2005. To date, Plaintiff has not submitted the completed

forms or paid the filing fee. 

Case 1:05-cv-00605-AWI -SMS Document 7 Filed 07/08/05 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

1The Court may take judicial notice of facts that are capable of accurate and ready determination by resort

to sources whose accuracy cannot reasonably be questioned. Fed. R. Evid. 201(b); United States v. Bernal-Obeso,

989 F.2d 331, 333 (9th Cir. 1993). Judicial notice may be taken of court records. Valerio v. Boise Cascade Corp., 80

F.R.D. 626, 635 n. 1 (N.D.Cal.1978), aff'd, 645 F.2d 699 (9th Cir.); see also Colonial Penn Ins. Co. v. Coil, 887 F.2d

1236, 1239 (4th Cir. 1989); Rodic v. Thistledown Racing Club, Inc., 615 F.2d 736, 738 (6th Cir. 1980). 

2

The Court takes judicial notice of court records indicating that Plaintiff, on three or more

occasions, has filed actions that have been dismissed as frivolous, malicious or for failure to state

a claim for relief.1

Title 28 U.S.C. § 1915 governs proceedings in forma pauperis. Section 1915(g) provides

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

In this case, Plaintiff has filed the following three actions which have all be dismissed for

Plaintiff’s failure to state a claim: Tubach v. Gomez, CV F 97-5549 OWW DLB P, dismissed on

October 17, 1997 as frivolous; Tubach v. Farmon, CV F 96-5551 REC SMS P, dismissed on

February 24, 1998 as frivolous; and Tubach v. Riley, CV F 98-5603 REC HGB P, also

dismissed on March 12, 1999, as frivolous. All of these cases were terminated prior to Plaintiff’s

initiation of this action on May 5, 2005 and thus, Plaintiff is precluded from proceeding in forma

pauperis in any action filed after that date unless Plaintiff is, at the time the Complaint is filed,

under imminent danger of serious physical injury. 

The Court has examined the Complaint and finds that the case presents no facts from

which an inference can be drawn that Plaintiff was under any continuing or imminent danger of

serious physical injury at the time the action was filed. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). 

Accordingly, based on the foregoing, the court HEREBY RECOMMENDS that:

1. The action be DISMISSED without prejudice.

IT IS ORDERED that these Findings and Recommendations be submitted to the United

States District Judge assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of Title 28 U.S.C.

Case 1:05-cv-00605-AWI -SMS Document 7 Filed 07/08/05 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

§ 636(b)(l). Within THIRTY (30) days after being served with these Findings and

Recommendations, Plaintiff may file written objections with the court. The document should be

captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” Plaintiff is

advised that failure to file objections within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the

District Court’s order. Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991).

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: July 7, 2005 /s/ Sandra M. Snyder 

icido3 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:05-cv-00605-AWI -SMS Document 7 Filed 07/08/05 Page 3 of 3