Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Lonnie Williams v. Guzman

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA


April 7, 2011

LONNIE WILLIAMS, PLAINTIFF,
v.
GUZMAN, ET AL., DEFENDANTS.

ORDER

Plaintiff, a prisoner without counsel, has filed a complaint alleging civil rights violations. See 42 U.S.C. § 1983. She*fn1 has submitted an affidavit requesting leave to proceed in forma pauperis pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(1). Dckt. No. 8.

On March 18, 2011, this court dismissed plaintiff's complaint because plaintiff had joined unrelated claims and ordered plaintiff to file an amended complaint containing only related claims. Dckt. No. 9. The court noted that plaintiff has filed three or more actions that have been dismissed as frivolous, malicious, or for failing to state a claim and has accordingly been designated a "three strikes" litigant under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). Williams v. Gonzalez, No. 03-6770, Dckt. No. 24, Order of Sept. 10, 2004. Thus, the court informed plaintiff that she is not entitled to proceed in forma pauperis unless she is under imminent danger of serious physical injury. Dckt. No. 9 at 3.

Plaintiff filed her amended complaint on March 30, 2011. Dckt. No. 10. In the amended complaint, plaintiff alleges that defendant Guzman refused to remove an "R" suffix from plaintiff's chronos and central file, causing plaintiff to lose her dining hall job, preventing her from obtaining a job in the law library, and resulting in name-calling from other inmates and other harm to her reputation. Dckt. No. 10 at 4-5. Plaintiff alleges that the "R" suffix is a designation attached to inmates who have been arrested or convicted of a sex offense. Id. Plaintiff alleges that defendant Guzman's conduct caused her emotional injury and disregarded her "past, present, and future" safety. Id. at 5. Plaintiff does not identify any present threat to her physical well-being, however. Plaintiff further alleges that defendant Daly failed to process plaintiff's grievance against defendant Guzman. Id. at 5-6.

A plaintiff may satisfy the "imminent danger" exception to the three strikes rule of § 1915(g) by alleging facts indicating an ongoing danger of serious physical injury. Andrews v. Cervantes, 493 F.3d 1047, 1056-57 (9th Cir. 2007). Plaintiff has alleged no facts indicating that she is facing an ongoing danger of serious physical injury.

Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED that plaintiff shall show cause, within thirty days of the date of service of this order, why her application to proceed in forma pauperis should not be denied pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g) and why plaintiff should not be directed to submit the $350 filing fee, in full, or suffer dismissal pursuant to Local Rule 110.


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.