Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

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

Blackman v. Dixon

United States District Court, E.D. California

July 8, 2019

TONY BLACKMAN, Plaintiff,
v.
MR. R. DIXON, et al., Defendants.

          ORDER AND FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

          ALLISON CLAIRE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

         Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, seeks relief pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and has requested authority pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915 to proceed in forma pauperis. ECF Nos. 1, 2, 5. This proceeding was referred to this court by Local Rule 302 pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1).

         For the reasons stated below, the undersigned will recommend that plaintiff's request to proceed in forma pauperis be denied. It will be recommended that plaintiff be ordered to pay the required filing fee of $350.00 plus the $50.00 administrative fee, [1] in their entirety, prior to proceeding further with this action, or face dismissal.

         I. APPLICABLE LAW

         28 U.S.C. § 1915(g) states:

In no event shall a prisoner bring a civil action or appeal a judgment in a civil action or proceeding 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.

28 U.S.C. § 1915(g).

         “It is well-settled that, in determining a [Section] 1915(g) ‘strike,' the reviewing court looks to the dismissing court's action and the reasons underlying it.” Knapp v. Hogan, 738 F.3d 1106, 1109 (9th Cir. 2013) (brackets added) (citation omitted). “[Section] 1915(g) should be used to deny a prisoner's in forma pauperis status only when, after careful evaluation of the order dismissing an action, and other relevant information, the district court determines that the action was dismissed because it was frivolous, malicious or failed to state a claim.” Andrews v. King, 398 F.3d 1113, 1121 (9th Cir. 2006) (brackets added).

         II. PLAINTIFF'S SECTION 1915(g) “STRIKE” CASES

         A review of plaintiff s filing history in federal court indicates that the following cases of his were dismissed for reasons identified in Section 1915(g) and were adjudicated prior to the filing of the instant action:

Blackman v. Taxdahl, E.D. Cal. No. 1:99-cv-5822 REC HGB (case dismissed for failure to state a claim on March 12, 2001);
Blackman v. Variz, N.D. Cal. No. 3:06-cv-6398 SI (case dismissed for failure to state a claim on December 18, 2006);
Blackman v. Mazariegos, N.D. Cal. No. 3:06-cv-7625 SI (complaint dismissed with leave to amend for failure to state a claim; case subsequently dismissed on September 4, 2007, for failure to file an amended complaint); and
• Blackman v. Mazariegos, N.D. Cal. No. 3:07-cv-2021 SI (case dismissed for failure to state a claim ...

Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

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