Case Name: Robert DAVIS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. WILLIAM STEPHENS, Director, Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Correctional Institutions Division, Defendant-Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2015-01-08
Citations: 589 F. App'x 295
Docket Number: No. 14-10808
Parties: Robert DAVIS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. WILLIAM STEPHENS, Director, Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Correctional Institutions Division, Defendant-Appellee.
Judges: Before PRADO, OWEN, and GRAVES, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 589
Pages: 295–296

Head Matter:
Robert DAVIS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. WILLIAM STEPHENS, Director, Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Correctional Institutions Division, Defendant-Appellee.
No. 14-10808
Summary Calendar.
United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
Jan. 8, 2015..
Robert Davis, Abilene, TX, pro se.
Before PRADO, OWEN, and GRAVES, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Robert Davis, Texas prisoner # 584008, moves for leave to proceed in forma pau-peris (IFP) to appeal the district court's dismissal of his 42 U.S.C. § 1988 complaint pursuant to the three-strikes provision of 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). Under § 1915(g), a prisoner may not proceed IFP in a civil action or in an appeal of a judgment in a civil action if he has, on three or more occasions during his incarceration, brought an action or appeal that was dismissed as frivolous or for failure to state a claim, unless the prisoner is under imminent danger of serious physical injury. Davis has failed to demonstrate that he was under imminent danger of serious physical injury at the time that he sought to file his complaint in the district court, proceed with his appeal, or move to proceed IFP. See § 1915(g); Banos v. O'Guin, 144 F.3d 883, 884 (5th Cir.1998). His allegation that he might be seriously injured at an indefinite point in the future because he has been required to wear shoes that are the wrong size and are damaged is insufficient to establish that he was in imminent danger of serious physical injury at the relevant times. See § 1915(g); Banos, 144 F.3d at 884-85. Thus, Davis's motion for leave to proceed IFP is DENIED, and the appeal is DISMISSED as frivolous. See 5th Cir. R. 42.2; Baugh v. Taylor, 117 F.3d 197, 202 (5th Cir.1997).
Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.