Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_06-cv-01202/USCOURTS-caed-1_06-cv-01202-1/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

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

WILLIE WEAVER,

Plaintiff, CV F 06 1202 OWW WMW P

vs. FINDING AND RECOMMENDATION 

CCI FIRST WATCH, et al.,

Defendants.

Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se in a civil rights action challenging the

conditions of his confinement.

On September 11, 2006, an order was entered, directing Plaintiff to show cause, within

thirty days, why his application to proceed in forma pauperis should not be denied pursuant to 28

U.S.C. § 1915(g). Plaintiff has not filed a response to the court’s order.

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 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.” 28

U.S.C. § 1915(g). 

This plaintiff has, on 3 prior occasions, brought civil actions challenging the

Case 1:06-cv-01202-OWW -WMW Document 5 Filed 11/28/06 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

2

conditions of his confinement. All three action were dismissed as frivolous, or for failure to state

a claim upon which relief can be granted. Weaver v. Pelican Bay State Prison, No. C 04-3077

JW (PR) (N.D. Cal May 18, 2005); Weaver v. Nimrod, No. C 04-3154 JW (PR) (N.D. Cal. Dec.

14, 2004); Weaver v. Daniel, No. C 05-1373 JW (PR) (N.D. Cal. May 9, 2005); Weaver v.

Pelican Bay State Prison Mail Room, No. C 04-4784 JW (PR) (N.D. Cal. Jan. 5, 2005); Weaver

v. Montiero, et al., No. 05-0166 RSWL (FMO) (C.D. Cal. Nov. 21, 2005). Plaintiff is therefore

not entitled to proceed in forma pauperis unless he alleges facts indicating that he is in imminent

danger of serious physical injury. There are no such facts alleged in this case. 

In his response to the order to show cause, Plaintiff argues, without merit, that the PLRA

is unconstitutional. Plaintiff also restates the allegations of the complaint. The allegations

consists of vague accusations of conspiracy, and that correctional officials are controlling

Plaintiff’s mind by devices in the wall of his cell and the ventilation shaft. Plaintiff has not

specifically charged any individual defendant with facts that meet the standard set forth in

section 1915(g).

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that:

1. Plaintiff is not authorized to proceed’s application to proceed in forma pauperis is

denied pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g).

2. Plaintiff be directed to submit, within thirty days of the date of service of this order,

the $350 filing fee in full. Plaintiff’s failure to do so will result in dismissal of this action

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

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: November 27, 2006 /s/ William M. Wunderlich 

mmkd34 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:06-cv-01202-OWW -WMW Document 5 Filed 11/28/06 Page 2 of 2