Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_24-cv-00686/USCOURTS-caed-1_24-cv-00686-5/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 550
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Civil Rights (U.S. defendant)
Cause of Action: 28:1331 Federal Question: Bivens Act

---

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

JAMES SCOTT ALVA,

Plaintiff,

v.

STATE OF CALIFORNIA, et al.,

Defendant.

Case No. 1:24-cv-0686 JLT SKO

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND 

RECOMMENDATIONS, DENYING

PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO PROCEED IN 

FORMA PAUPERIS, AND DIRECTING 

PLAINTIFF TO PAY THE FILING FEE 

WITHIN THIRTY DAYS

(Doc. 15)

James Scott Alva1filed this civil rights action pursuant to Bivens vs. Six Unknown Agents, 

403 U.S. 388 (1971), and seeks to proceed in forma pauperis in the action. (Docs. 1, 14.) The 

magistrate judge found that “Plaintiff has accrued three or more strikes’” under 28 U.S.C. § 1915, 

identifying the following actions that were dismissed prior to the filing of this action:

1. Alva v. Titsworth, et al., No. 2:18-cv-00476-JAD-PAL (Nev.), 

dismissed with prejudice for failure to state a claim on April 20, 2019

2. Alva v. Alva, et. al., No. 2:18-cv-00788-JAD-NJK (Nev.), 

dismissed as frivolous on July 17, 2018

3. Cole v. State of Louisiana, No. 2:22-cv-01045-JAD-EDY (Nev.), 

adopting recommendation to dismiss for failure to state a claim on 

September 15, 2022

(Id. at 3-4.) In addition, the magistrate judge found Plaintiff does not qualify for the imminent 

danger exception to Section 1915. (Id. at 4-5.)

1 Plaintiff also identifies himself as “jim-SCOTT:COLE.” (See Doc. 1 at 1.)

Case 1:24-cv-00686-JLT-SKO Document 19 Filed 10/21/24 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

In response to the Findings and Recommendations, Plaintiff filed objections (Doc. 15), a 

letter to the Court (Doc. 16), and a document “rebutting” the Findings and Recommendations 

(Doc. 17). However, Plaintiff does not appear to dispute the determination that he has three 

strikes under Section 1915. In addition, the Court is unable to discern any factual allegations 

supporting a conclusion that he was in imminent danger of serious physical injury at the time the 

complaint was filed.

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

Having carefully reviewed the matter, including Plaintiff’s objections, the Court concludes the 

Findings and Recommendations to be supported by the record and proper analysis. Thus, the 

Court ORDERS:

1. The Findings and Recommendations issued September 13, 2024 (Doc. 15) are 

ADOPTED in full.

2. Plaintiff’s application to proceed in forma pauperis (Doc. 14) is DENIED.

3. Plaintiff SHALL pay the full $405 filing fee for this action within 30 days of the 

date of service of this order. 

Failure to pay the filing fee will result in the dismissal of this action without 

prejudice.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: October 18, 2024 

Case 1:24-cv-00686-JLT-SKO Document 19 Filed 10/21/24 Page 2 of 2