Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_06-cv-06396/USCOURTS-cand-3_06-cv-06396-1/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

27

28

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

KIMOTHY R. McCRAY, 

Plaintiff(s),

 vs.

EDWARD J. CADEN, et al.,

Defendant(s). 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. C 06-6396 CRB (PR)

ORDER OF DISMISSAL

Plaintiff, a prisoner at Kern Valley State Prison and frequent litigant in

federal court, filed a pro se civil rights complaint under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 alleging

harassment and retaliation by correctional staff. Plaintiff also sought to proceed

in forma pauperis under 28 U.S.C. § 1915. 

Per order filed on November 13, 2006, the court found that 28 U.S.C. §

1915(g) bars plaintiff from proceeding in forma pauperis in this action because

plaintiff: (1) has had three or more prior prisoner actions dismissed by a federal

district court on the grounds that they are frivolous, malicious, or fail to state a

claim upon which relief may be granted; and (2) is not seeking relief from a

danger of serious physical injury which is imminent at the time of filing. Nov.

13, 2006 Order at 2 (citing cases). 

Case 3:06-cv-06396-CRB Document 5 Filed 12/18/06 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

27

28 2

Pursuant to the law of the circuit, plaintiff nonetheless was afforded an

opportunity to persuade the court that § 1915(g) does not bar pauper status for

him. Id. (citing Andrews v. King, 398 F.3d 1113, 1120 (9th Cir. 2005)). The

court gave plaintiff 30 days to "show cause why § 1915(g) does not bar pauper

status for him," and explained that "[f]ailure to show cause, or pay the requisite 

$ 350.00 filing fee, within the designated time will result in the dismissal of this

action without prejudice to bringing it in a new paid complaint." Id. at 2-3.

Plaintiff did not file a response to the court's order. He did file a "motion

to proceed with civil rights complaint . . . in forma pauperis" in an accompanying

case, however. See McCray v. Caden, No. C 06-3963 CRB (PR) (N.D. Cal. filed

June 27, 2006). In it, he simply reiterates the allegations of both of his

complaints and in no persuasive manner shows that § 1915(g) does not bar

pauper status for him. The motion is DENIED and the action is DISMISSED

without prejudice to bringing it in a paid complaint.

The clerk shall enter judgment in accordance with this order and close the

file. No fee is due.

SO ORDERED.

DATED: December 18, 2006 CHARLES R. BREYER

United States District Judge 

Case 3:06-cv-06396-CRB Document 5 Filed 12/18/06 Page 2 of 2