Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_06-cv-00236/USCOURTS-caed-2_06-cv-00236-4/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

ANTHONY SHARP, et al.,

Plaintiffs, No. CIV S-06-0236 MCE GGH P

vs.

LAURIE MAZZOLA, et al.,

Defendants. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

 /

Plaintiffs Anthony Sharp and Larry Sharp are state prisoners proceeding pro se

with this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On May 18, 2006, the court granted

plaintiffs’ request to proceed in forma pauperis and ordered each plaintiff liable for one half of

the $250 filing fee.

On December 26, 2006, defendants filed a motion to revoke plaintiff Anthony

Sharp’s in forma pauperis status and to dismiss for failure to state a claim. For the reasons

discussed below, the court finds that defendants’ motion to revoke plaintiff Anthony Sharp’s

filing fee has merit. 

/////

/////

/////

Case 2:06-cv-00236-MCE -GGH Document 38 Filed 03/15/07 Page 1 of 3
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

 Judicial notice may be taken of court records. Valerio v. Boise Cascade Corp., 80 1

F.R.D. 626, 635 n.1 (N.D. Cal. 1978), aff'd, 645 F.2d 699 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 454 U.S. 1126

(1981). 

2

28 U.S.C. § 1915(g) provides,

In no event shall a prisoner bring a civil action or appeal a judgment in a civil

action or proceeding 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 the imminent threat of danger of serious physical

injury. 

Plaintiffs filed this action on May 3, 2006. Court records indicate that plaintiff

Anthony Sharp has had three prior actions dismissed for failing to state a claim upon which relief

may be granted. On September 5, 2003, Sharp v. Mason, CIV S-03-1354 EJG DAD P was

dismissed for failure to state a claim. On December 29, 2004, Sharp v. Cueva, CIV S-02-1686 1

FCD GGH P was dismissed for failure to state a claim. On March 21, 2005, Sharp v. Arcamone,

CIV S-04-0595 DFL GGH P was dismissed for failure to state a claim. 

Because there is no claim that plaintiff is under an imminent threat of danger of

serious physical injury, the court recommends that defendants’ motion to revoke plaintiff

Anthony Sharp’s in forma pauperis status be granted. Plaintiff shall pay the remaining balance of

his filing fee within thirty days of the adoption of these findings and recommendations. 

According to court record, plaintiff still owes the entire fee of $125. If plaintiff does not pay this

amount within that time, he will be dismissed from this action. The court will address

defendants’ motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim following the resolution of plaintiff’s

payment of the balance of his filing fee.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that defendants’ December 26,

2006, motion to revoke plaintiff Anthony Sharp’s filing fee be granted; within thirty days of the

adoption of these findings and recommendations, plaintiff Anthony Sharp shall pay the $125

balance due on his filing fee. 

Case 2:06-cv-00236-MCE -GGH Document 38 Filed 03/15/07 Page 2 of 3
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

3

These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District

Judge assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within twenty

days after being served with these findings and recommendations, any party may file written

objections with the court and serve a copy on all parties. Such a document should be captioned 

“Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” Any reply to the objections

shall be served and filed within ten days after service of the objections. The parties are advised

that failure to file objections within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District

Court’s order. Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991). 

DATED: 3/14/07

/s/ Gregory G. Hollows

 

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

sharp235.fr

Case 2:06-cv-00236-MCE -GGH Document 38 Filed 03/15/07 Page 3 of 3