Meador v. California Correctional Institution et al

Filing 26

NOTICE AND ORDER Finding that Plaintiff is not Entitled to Proceed In Forma Pauperis on the Appeal Filed August 23, 2010; ORDER DIRECTING Clerk's Office to Serve Copy of Order on Ninth Circuit signed by Magistrate Judge Sandra M. Snyder on 8/25/2010. (Sant Agata, S)

(PC) Meador v. California Correctional Institution et al

Doc. 26

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 8 9 10 11 12 13 Defendants. 14 15 16 Plaintiff William Langston Meador is a prisoner who was proceeding pro se and in forma 17 pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On August 3, 2010, the Court 18 dismissed this action, with prejudice, based on Plaintiff's failure to state a claim upon which relief 19 may be granted and judgment was entered. (Docs. 21, 22.) Plaintiff filed a notice of appeal on 20 August 23, 2010. (Doc. 23.) 21 Pursuant to the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure, 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 A party who was permitted to proceed in forma pauperis in the district-court action . . . may proceed on appeal in forma pauperis without further authorization, unless: (A) the district court - before or after the notice of appeal is filed - certifies that the appeal is not taken in good faith or finds that the party is not otherwise entitled to proceed in forma pauperis and states in writing its reasons for the certification or finding; or (B) a statute provides otherwise. Fed. R. App. P. 24(a)(3). /// 1
Dockets.Justia.com

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WILLIAM LANGSTON MEADOR, Plaintiff, v. CALIFORNIA CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION, et al.,

CASE NO. 1:07-cv-00365-SMS PC APPEAL NO. 10-16862 NOTICE AND ORDER FINDING THAT PLAINTIFF IS NOT ENTITLED TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS ON THE APPEAL FILED AUGUST 23, 2010 ORDER DIRECTING CLERK'S OFFICE TO SERVE COPY OF ORDER ON NINTH CIRCUIT /

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

The district clerk must immediately notify the parties and the court of appeals when the district court does any of the following: (A) denies a motion to proceed on appeal in forma pauperis; (B) certifies that the appeal is not taken in good faith; or (C) finds that the party is not otherwise entitled to proceed in forma pauperis. Fed. R. App. P. 24(a)(4). Because Plaintiff was proceeding in forma pauperis in this action in the district court, Plaintiff is entitled to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal unless the Court makes a finding to the contrary. For the reason that follows, the Court finds that Plaintiff is not entitled to proceed in forma pauperis on his appeal filed August 23, 2010. 28 U.S.C. § 1915 governs proceedings in forma pauperis. Section 1915(g) 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 became subject to section 1915(g) on August 5, 2008, when his third action was dismissed for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted.1 Because Plaintiff is subject to section 1915(g) and does not meet the imminent danger exception, Plaintiff is not entitled to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal. Fed. R. App. P. 24(a)(4)(C). Based on the foregoing, it is HEREBY ORDERED that: 1. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g), Plaintiff is not entitled to proceed in forma pauperis on the appeal filed on August 23, 2010; 2. Pursuant to Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 24(a)(4)(C), this order serves as notice to the parties and the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit of the finding that Plaintiff is not entitled to proceed in forma pauperis for this appeal; and

The Court takes judicial notice of the following cases: 1:05-cv-00939-OW W -D L B PC Meador v. Pleasant V a lle y State Prison, et al. (dismissed 07/12/2007 for failure to state a claim); 1:07-cv-00952-LJO-DLB PC Meador v . C.C.I. Tehachapi, et al. (dismissed 06/30/2008 for failure to state a claim); 1:06-cv-01572-AW I -D L B PC Meador v . Corcoran State Prison, et al. (dismissed 08/05/2008 for failure to state a claim); and 1:06-cv-00926-LJO-GSA PC M e a d o r v. Pleasant Valley State Prison, et al. (dismissed 05/26/2009 for failure to state a claim).

1

2

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

3.

The Clerk of the Court shall serve a copy of this order on Plaintiff and the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.

IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: icido3 August 25, 2010 /s/ Sandra M. Snyder UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

3