Boyd v. Williams et al

Filing 23

ORDER granting 18 Defendants' motion to vacate; revoking Mr. Boyd's IFP status; and informing Mr. Boyd, if wishes to proceed with this action, he must pay the $405 filing and administrative fee within 30 days. Signed by Magistrate Judge Edie R. Ervin on 1/06/2025. (llg)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS
DELTA DIVISION
MICHAEL L. BOYD
ADC #115890
V.

PLAINTIFF
NO. 2:24-cv-00174-KGB-ERE

TIFFANY WILLIAMS, et al.

DEFENDANTS
ORDER

Pro se plaintiff Michael L. Boyd, an Arkansas Division of Correction (“ADC”)
inmate, filed this lawsuit under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Doc. 2. Mr. Boyd’s complaint alleges
that Captain Tiffany Williams, Director Dexter Payne, and Supervisor Southern retaliated
against him for exercising his First Amendment rights by tampering with his mail. He sues
Defendants in both their individual and official capacities seeking monetary damages.
The Court originally: (1) granted Mr. Boyd’s motion for leave to proceed in forma
pauperis (IFP); and (2) determined that Mr. Boyd arguably stated a First Amendment
retaliation claim against Defendants. Doc. 5.
Defendants have now moved for the Court to vacate its September 25, 2024 Order
granting Mr. Boyd’s motion for leave to proceed and revoke Mr. Boyd’s IFP status because
he is a three-striker. Doc. 18. Defendants’ motion has merit.
Court records show that, before filing this lawsuit, Mr. Boyd had at least three cases
dismissed based on his failure to state a plausible constitutional claim for relief.1 As a

1

The following dismissals should be considered “strikes” for purposes of 28 U.S.C.
§ 1915(g): Boyd v. Steele, E.D. Ark. Case No. 4:02-cv-00123-BRW (April 24, 2002

result, in order to proceed IFP, Mr. Boyd must allege facts sufficient to show that he is in
imminent danger of serious physical injury. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g); Ashley v. Dilworth,
147 F.3d 715, 717 (8th Cir. 1998). Mr. Boyd’s complaint does not allege any such facts.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED THAT:
1.

Defendants’ motion to vacate (Doc. 18) is GRANTED. Mr. Boyd’s IFP

status is hereby revoked.
2.

If Mr. Boyd wishes to proceed with this action, he must pay the $405

filing and administrative fee within 30 days.
3.

Mr. Boyd’s failure to comply with this Court’s Order may result in the

dismissal of his claims, without prejudice. See Local Rule 5.5(c).
SO ORDERED 6 January 2025.

____________________________________
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

dismissal for failure to state a claim); Boyd v. Wheeling Machine Products, E.D. Ark. Case
No. 5:02-cv-00170-JMM (July 2, 2024 dismissal for same); Boyd v. Harrison, et al., E.D.
Ark. Case No. 2:19-cv-00119-KGB (June 8, 2020 dismissal for same); and Boyd v. Payne,
et al., E.D. Ark. Case No. 2:23-cv-228-BSM (Dec. 22, 2023 dismissal for same). Although
Defendants contend that the Court’s dismissal of Mr. Boyd’s claims in Boyd v. Owney,
E.D. Ark. Case No. 5:02-cv-413-GH also counts as a strike, the Court disagrees. The Court
dismissed Mr. Boyd’s claims in that case based on his failure to prosecute that lawsuit. The
Court no longer considers such dismissals strikes for purposes of 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). See
Anderson v. Langley, 2003 WL 23019400 (8th Cir. 2003) (indicating that dismissals for
failure to prosecute and for failure to exhaust “may not fall within the ambit of section
1915(g).”).

2