Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_24-cv-00013/USCOURTS-caed-1_24-cv-00013-2/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

JESSE L. YOUNGBLOOD,

Plaintiff,

v.

TUTOMER, et al.,

Defendants.

No. 1:24-cv-00013-KES-BAM

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND 

RECOMMENDATIONS TO DENY IN 

FORMA PAUPERIS STATUS AND 

ORDERING PLAINTIFF TO PAY FILING 

FEE

Doc. 8

Plaintiff Jesse L. Youngblood is a state prisoner proceeding pro se in this civil rights 

action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. This matter was referred to a United States magistrate judge 

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302.

On January 4, 2024, plaintiff filed his initial complaint along with a motion to proceed in 

forma pauperis. Docs. 1, 2. On January 9, 2024, the assigned magistrate judge issued findings 

and recommendations that plaintiff’s application to proceed in forma pauperis be denied pursuant 

to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g) and that plaintiff be required to pay the $405.00 filing fee in full to 

proceed with this action. Doc 8. Specifically, the findings and recommendations find that 

plaintiff has accumulated more than three “strikes” and that he has failed to demonstrate that he 

meets the imminent danger exception under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). Id. at 2. Plaintiff timely filed 

objections on January 22, 2024. Doc. 9. 

Case 1:24-cv-00013-KES-BAM Document 21 Filed 01/13/25 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

Plaintiff’s objections assert that he is “guaranteed...viable and adequate access to the 

courts for available remedies.” Id. at 2. However, the findings and recommendations do not 

recommend dismissal of plaintiff’s case; they recommend that plaintiff not be allowed to proceed 

in forma pauperis. If plaintiff pays the required filing fee, his action may proceed. In his 

objections, plaintiff also argues he should be granted in forma pauperis status in this action 

because he had previously been granted such status in prior cases. Id. at 2. However, the 

determination of in forma pauperis status in the instant action is based on plaintiff’s present 

circumstances, and the magistrate judge correctly found that in forma pauperis status should be 

denied as the plaintiff has three prior “strikes” and fails to meet the imminent danger exception

under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). Doc. 8. 

Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636 (b)(1), this Court conducted a de novo review of the case. 

Having carefully reviewed the matter, the Court concludes the findings and recommendations are 

supported by the record and proper analysis. Thus, plaintiff may not proceed in forma pauperis 

and is required to pay the filing fee in full before proceeding any further with this action. 

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 

1. The findings and recommendations issued on January 9, 2024, Doc. 8, are ADOPTED in 

full;

2. Plaintiff is PRECLUDED from proceeding in forma pauperis in this action pursuant to 28 

U.S.C. § 1915(g); and

3. Plaintiff SHALL pay the $405.00 filing fee within thirty (30) days of the date of service of 

this order. If plaintiff fails to pay the filing fee within the specified time, this action will 

be dismissed without further notice.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: January 10, 2025 

 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:24-cv-00013-KES-BAM Document 21 Filed 01/13/25 Page 2 of 2