Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca7-15-01542/USCOURTS-ca7-15-01542-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 555
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Prison Condition
Cause of Action: 

---

United States Court of Appeals 

For the Seventh Circuit

Chicago, Illinois 60604

Submitted October 29, 2015*

Decided November 16, 2015

Before

DIANE P. WOOD, Chief Judge

RICHARD A. POSNER, Circuit Judge

FRANK H. EASTERBROOK, Circuit Judge

No. 15‐1542

WINFORD BRYANT,

Plaintiff‐Appellant,

v.

KEITH S. BRIN,

Defendant‐Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District

Court for the Northern District of Illinois,

Eastern Division.

No. 14 C 5384

Charles R. Norgle,

Judge.

O R D E R

Winford Bryant, an Illinois prisoner, filed this civil‐rights suit against the Clerk of

the Circuit Court of Lake County, Illinois, and moved to proceed in forma pauperis.

See 42 U.S.C. § 1983; 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(1). The district court dismissed the case for

failure to state a claim and noted that the dismissal counts as a “strike” under 28 U.S.C.

§ 1915(g). Bryant filed a notice of appeal, and the district court authorized him to

proceed IFP on appeal. Yet the court did not know, because Bryant had lied about his

                                                 

* After examining the briefs and record, we have concluded that oral argument is

unnecessary. Thus the appeal is submitted on the briefs and record. See FED. R. APP. P.

34(a)(2)(C).

NONPRECEDENTIAL DISPOSITION

To be cited only in accordance with Fed. R. App. P. 32.1

Case: 15-1542 Document: 20 Filed: 11/16/2015 Pages: 2
No. 15‐1542    Page 2

litigation history, that he previously had incurred strikes in two other lawsuits (and in

both was told by the district court that he had incurred a strike). See Bryant v. Obama,

No. 10 C 6278 (N.D. Ill. Nov. 18, 2010); Bryant v. Obama, No. 10 C 2375 (N.D. Ill. July 13,

2010). In Bryant’s form complaint, where directed to disclose “ALL lawsuits” filed “in

any state or federal court,” he listed only Bryant v. Del Re, No. 05 C 2509 (N.D. Ill.

Mar. 20, 2007), which had settled and thus did not incur a strike.

Thus, Bryant has incurred three strikes. He may not proceed with this appeal IFP

unless he is in “imminent danger of serious physical injury,” which he is not.

See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). The district court was misled into granting IFP on appeal, and

Bryant may not benefit from this error. See Ammons v. Gerlinger, 547 F.3d 724, 725

(7th Cir. 2008); Robinson v. Powell, 297 F.3d 540, 541 (7th Cir. 2002). Having attempted to

deceive federal judges about his IFP status, Bryant “cannot expect favorable treatment

on matters of discretion,” which includes the privilege to proceed IFP. See Campbell v.

Clarke, 481 F.3d 967, 969 (7th Cir. 2007). The appeal is dismissed and Bryant remains

responsible for all fees due, both to this court and the district court. See id.; Thurman v.

Gramley, 97 F.3d 185, 188 (7th Cir. 1996), overruled in part on other grounds by Walker v.

O’Brien, 216 F.3d 626, 628–29 & n.1 (7th Cir. 2000). If Bryant attempts to file other

litigation without paying required fees, he risks an order under Support Sys. Int’l, Inc. v.

Mack, 45 F.3d 185 (7th Cir. 1995), barring him from filing any civil suits in this circuit

until he has paid all the fees he owes. See Campbell, 481 F.3d at 970.

DISMISSED.

Case: 15-1542 Document: 20 Filed: 11/16/2015 Pages: 2