Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_15-cv-01941/USCOURTS-caed-1_15-cv-01941-0/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

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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Plaintiff Seavon Pierce (“Plaintiff”), a state prisoner proceeding pro se, filed this action 

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1361, on December 11, 2015. That same day, he also filed a motion for leave 

to proceed in forma pauperis. (ECF No. 2.) 

Plaintiff is subject to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g), which 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.”1

 

1 The Court takes judicial notice of the following United States District Court cases: Seavon Pierce v. Lancaster 

State Prison, 2:13-CV-08126 (dismissed for frivolousness, failure to state a claim, and as malicious); Seavon 

Pierce v. Fernando Gonzales, et al., 1:10-cv-00285-JLT (dismissed on December 3, 2012 for failure to state a 

SEAVON PIERCE,

 Plaintiff,

v.

JONATHAN M. SMITH, et al.,

Defendants.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Case No.: 1:15-cv-01941-LJO-BAM (PC)

ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR 

LEAVE TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS

(ECF No. 2)

ORDER DISMISSING ACTION WITHOUT 

PREJUDICE TO REFILING WITH SUBMISSION 

OF $400.00 FILING FEE

Case 1:15-cv-01941-LJO-BAM Document 7 Filed 01/11/16 Page 1 of 2
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

The Court has reviewed Plaintiff’s complaint and his allegations do not satisfy the imminent 

danger exception to section 1915(g). Andrews v. Cervantes, 493 F.3d 1047, 1055-56 (9th Cir. 2007). 

Plaintiff seeks to compel Jonathan M. Smith, an officer of the United States Department of Justice, to 

act with regards to Plaintiff’s allegations of public corruption, intentional acts to obstruct justice, and 

acts upon a class of prisoners as evidenced upon the public record. (ECF No. 1, p. 2.) Plaintiff

specifically alleges that he made a complaint in federal district court against certain parties and, 

through fraud, certain parties were removed from that complaint. He seeks a federal criminal 

enforcement proceeding regarding the matter. Plaintiff makes no allegations concerning any imminent 

danger of serious physical injury. Therefore, Plaintiff has not satisfied the exception from the three 

strikes bar under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g), and must pay the $400.00 filing fee if he wishes to litigate this 

claim. 

Accordingly, the Court HEREBY ORDERS as follows:

1. Plaintiff’s motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis (ECF No. 2) is DENIED; and,

2. This action is DISMISSED without prejudice to re-filing accompanied by the $400.00 

filing fee. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: January 8, 2016 /s/ Lawrence J. O’Neill 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

 

claim); and Seavon Pierce v. President Barack Obama, et al., 1:15-cv-00650-LJO-DLB (dismissed December 1, 

2015, for failure to state a claim).

Case 1:15-cv-01941-LJO-BAM Document 7 Filed 01/11/16 Page 2 of 2