UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA

HAMMOND DIVISION

ADDONES SPENCER, )

)

Plaintiff, )

)

vs. ) CAUSE NO. 2:14-CV-418 PS

 )

PACT-BRADLEY HOUSE/CENTER, et al., ) 

)

Defendants. )

OPINION AND ORDER

Addones Spencer, a pro se prisoner, filed a complaint without paying the filing

fee. However, it would be futile to send Spencer an in forma pauperis petition because he

is barred from proceeding in forma pauperis by 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g) due to his having filed

three previous complaints which did not state a claim. This is commonly known as the

“Three Strikes Rule” and Spencer has accumulated three strikes:

(1) Spencer v. U.S. Probation Department, 1:12-CV-363 (N.D. Ind. filed

October 17, 2012). Case dismissed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A on

October 24, 2012; 

(2) Spencer v. City of Fort Wayne, 1:12-CV-364 (N.D. Ind. filed

October 17, 2012). Case dismissed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)

and 28 U.S.C. § 1915A on November 26, 2012; and

(3) Spencer v. Campbell, 2:12-CV-438 (N.D. Ind. filed October 24,

2012). Case dismissed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b) on February 5,

2013. 

It is not news to Spencer that he has “struck out.” He has been told six times before –

including four times this year:
(1) Spencer v. Russo, 1:13-CV-451 (E.D. Tex. filed July 12, 2013),

order dated February 20, 2014;

(2) Spencer v. Texas University Medical Branch, 1:13-CV-731 (E.D. Tex.

filed December 26, 2013), order dated February 20, 2014;

(3) Spencer v. Womble, 1:13-CV-689 (E.D. Tex. filed November 25,

2013), order dated May 1, 2014;

(4) Spencer v. Does, 5:13-CV-692 (W.D. Okla. filed July 5, 2013), order

dated June 6, 2014; 

(5) Spencer v. Does, 5:13-CV-692 (W.D. Okla. filed July 5, 2013), order

dated July 31, 2014; and

(6) Spencer v. Does, 5:13-CV-692 (W.D. Okla. filed July 5, 2013), order

dated August 25, 2014. 

 An inmate who has struck out “can use the partial prepayment option in §

1915(b) only if in the future he ‘is under imminent danger of serious physical injury.’”

Abdul-Wadood v. Nathan, 91 F.3d 1023, 1025 (7th Cir. 1996). In order to meet the

imminent danger standard, the threat complained of must be real and proximate.

Ciarpaglini v. Saini, 352 F.3d 328, 330 (7th Cir. 2003). Only “genuine emergencies”

qualify as a basis for circumventing § 1915(g). Lewis v. Sullivan, 279 F.3d 526, 531 (7th

Cir. 2002). In this case, Spencer is seeking monetary damages from four defendants

based on events which occurred while he was being held at a halfway house in

Michigan City, Indiana, earlier this year. He alleges that he was denied access to the

recreation room because of his disability. He alleges that his medical treatment was

delayed. He alleges that he was wrongfully transferred to the Metropolitan Correctional

Center in Chicago, Illinois, where he is now being held. None of these allegations

2
plausibly allege that this case has anything to do with his now being in imminent

danger of serious physical injury. Thus, he may not proceed in forma pauperis and his

case must be dismissed, according to the procedure previously outlined by the Seventh

Circuit in Sloan v. Lesza:

Moreover, the fee remains due, and we held in Newlin v. Helman, 123 F.3d

429, 436-37 (7th Cir. 1997), that unpaid docket fees incurred by litigants

subject to § 1915(g) lead straight to an order forbidding further litigation.

Sloan’s appeal is dismissed for failure to pay the appellate filing and

docket fees. Until Sloan has paid in full all outstanding fees and sanctions

in all civil actions he has filed, the clerks of all courts in this circuit will

return unfiled all papers he tenders. This order does not apply to criminal

cases or petitions challenging the terms of his confinement, and may be

reexamined in two years under the approach of Newlin and Support

Systems International, Inc. v. Mack, 45 F.3d 185 (7th Cir. 1995). 

Sloan v. Lesza, 181 F.3d 857, 859 (7th Cir. 1999). 

Also pursuant to Sloan, the filing fee is still assessed and Spencer is restricted

until he has paid in full all outstanding filing fees and sanctions in all of his federal

court cases. The restriction imposed by this order does “not impede him from making

any filings necessary to protect him from imprisonment or other confinement, but . . . [it

does] not let him file any paper in any other suit . . . until he pays the money he owes.”

Support Sys. Int’l v. Mack, 45 F.3d 185, 186 (7th Cir. 1995). Neither does it restrict him

from filing a notice of appeal in this case. 

For the foregoing reasons, the court:

(1) DISMISSES this case WITHOUT PREJUDICE;

3
(2) ORDERS the plaintiff Addones Spencer, BOP # 11060-027 to pay (and the

facility having custody of him to automatically remit) to the clerk of this court 20

percent of the money he receives for each calendar month during which he receives

$10.00 or more, until the $400.00 filing fee is paid in full; 

(3) DIRECTS the clerk of court to return, unfiled, any papers filed in any civil

case by or on behalf of Addones Spencer (except for a notice of appeal in this case or

unless filed in a habeas corpus proceeding) until he has paid in full all outstanding fees

and sanctions in all civil actions in any federal court; 

(4) DIRECTS the clerk to note on the docket of this case any attempted filings in

violation of this order; and

(5) DIRECTS the clerk of court to ensure that a copy of this order is mailed to

each facility where the plaintiff is housed until the filing fee has been paid in full. 

SO ORDERED.

ENTERED: December 8, 2014

 s/Philip P. Simon 

CHIEF JUDGE

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

4