United States District Court, E.D. California
FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS RECOMMENDING
PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR LEAVE TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS
BE DENIED (ECF No. 8)
BARBARA A. MCAULIFFE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Paul Adams (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner
proceeding pro se in this civil rights action
pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff initiated this
action on August 2, 2019. (ECF No. 1.) Currently before the Court
is Plaintiff's motion for leave to proceed in forma
pauperis. (ECF No. 8.)
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.” Plaintiff has
been informed in a prior action that he is subject to section
Court has reviewed Plaintiff's complaint and finds that
his allegations do not satisfy the imminent danger exception
to section 1915(g). Andrews v. Cervantes, 493 F.3d
1047, 1053-55 (9th Cir. 2007). Plaintiff primarily alleges
that he and other similarly situated inmates are being
subjected to violations of various constitutional rights
because prisoners in California are not paid a minimum wage
for their labor. Plaintiff further alleges that the lack of a
minimum wage for prisoner workers creates a homelessness
problem among recent parolees, inflicting mental and
emotional distress on prisoners and parolees, who are being
deprived of basic human needs such as shelter, food,
clothing, and a safe environment. (ECF No. 1.)
has failed to allege that he was in any imminent danger of
serious physical injury at the time the complaint was filed.
Although Plaintiff alleges that he suffers from mental and
emotional injury, including severe stress at the prospect of
becoming “instantly homeless” when released on
parole, Plaintiff does not allege any imminent danger of
serious physical injury at the time of filing and therefore
has not satisfied the exception from the three strikes bar
under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). Plaintiff must pay the
$400.00 filing fee if he wishes to litigate this action.
it is HEREBY RECOMMENDED that:
1. The motion to proceed in forma pauperis, (ECF No.
8), be DENIED, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g); and
2. Plaintiff be ORDERED to pay the $400 initial filing fee in
full to proceed with this action.
Findings and Recommendations will be submitted to the United
States District Judge assigned to the case, pursuant to the
provisions of Title 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Within
fourteen (14) days after being served with
these Findings and Recommendations, Plaintiff may file
written objections with the court. The document should be
captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judge's
Findings and Recommendation.” Plaintiff is advised that
the failure to file objections within the specified time may
result in the waiver of the “right to challenge the
magistrate's factual findings” on appeal.
Wilkerson v. Wheeler, 772 F.3d 834, 839 (9th Cir.
2014) (citing Baxter v. Sullivan, 923 F.2d 1391,
1394 (9th Cir. 1991)).
 The action was originally filed as a
joint complaint with two pro se plaintiffs.
See Case No. 1:19-cv-01065-LJO-BAM (PC) (E.D. Cal.).
On August 14, 2019, the Court ordered Plaintiff's claims
severed and opened as a new civil action. (ECF No.
 The Court takes judicial notice of the
following United States District Court cases: (1) Adams
v. Gottlieb, Case No. 2:09-cv-03027-UA-PJW (C.D. Cal.)
(dismissed on May 19, 2009 as frivolous and
Heck-barred); (2) Adams v. Small, Case No.
3:10-cv-01211-MMA-POR (S.D. Cal.) (dismissed on February 1,
2012 for failure to state a claim), aff'd, Case
No. 12-55328 (9th Cir. November 4, 2013); (3) Adams v.
Raske, 3:11-cv-00243-WQH-JMA (S.D. Cal.) (dismissed on
August 13, 2013 as frivolous and for failure to state a
claim); and ...