Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_15-cv-00055/USCOURTS-caed-1_15-cv-00055-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Gary Dale Barger
Plaintiff
Gipson
Defendant

Document Text:

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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

GARY DALE BARGER aka

GARY FRANCIS FISHER,

Plaintiff,

v.

GIPSON,

Defendant.

_____________________________________/

Case No. 1:15-cv-00055-LJO-SKO (PC)

ORDER DISMISSING ACTION, WITHOUT 

PREJUDICE, PURSUANT TO 28 U.S.C. '

1915(G)

(Doc. 1)

Plaintiff Gary Dale Barger aka Gary Francis Fisher, # F85263, a state prisoner proceeding 

pro se, filed this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 on January 12, 2015. Plaintiff is 

subject to 28 U.S.C. 1915(g), which provides that “[i]n no event shall a prisoner bring a civil 

action . . . 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 imminent danger of serious physical injury.”1 

 

1

Plaintiff has at least three dismissals which qualify as final strikes under section 1915(g). Silva. The Court takes 

judicial notice of the following United States District Court cases: Barger aka Fisher v. FBI, et al., 1:13-cv-00414-

LJO-SAB (E.D.Cal.) (dismissed for failure to state a claim on Jul. 26, 2013); Barger aka Fisher v. FBI, et al., 1:13-cv00535-DLB (E.D.Cal.) (dismissed for failure to state a claim on Nov. 21, 2013); and Fisher v. Bivens, 6 Unknown 

Agents, et al., 2:14-cv-01439-UA(MAN) (C.D.Cal.) (dismissed for failure to state a claim on Mar. 6, 2014).

Case 1:15-cv-00055-LJO-SKO Document 2 Filed 01/14/15 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

The Court has reviewed Plaintiff’s complaint and his allegations do not satisfy the 

imminent danger exception to section 1915(g).

2

 Andrews v. Cervantes, 493 F.3d 1047, 1055-56

(9th Cir. 2007). If Plaintiff wishes to pursue this action, he must first pay the $400.00 filing fee. 

Accordingly, the Court HEREBY ORDERS as follows this action is DISMISSED, without 

prejudice to re-filing accompanied by the $400.00 filing fee.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: January 14, 2015 /s/ Lawrence J. O’Neill 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

 

2

Plaintiff is currently incarcerated at the California Health Care Facility in Stockton. Plaintiff’s allegations concern 

events which occurred at California State Prison-Corcoran approximately four years ago, and his complaint presents 

no allegations that he is under imminent danger of serious physical injury. 

Case 1:15-cv-00055-LJO-SKO Document 2 Filed 01/14/15 Page 2 of 2