Lazor v. Hedgpeth

Filing 3

ORDER signed by Judge Oliver W. Wanger on 3/20/07 DENYING Plaintiff leave to proceed in forma pauperis and REQUIRING payment of $350.00 filing fee for this action. Filing fee of $350.00 due by 4/23/2007. (Lundstrom, T)

Download PDF
(PC) Lazor v. Hedgpeth Doc. 3 Case 1:07-cv-00410-OWW-SMS Document 3 Filed 03/21/2007 Page 1 of 2 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Plaintiff P. F. Lazor ("plaintiff") is a state prisoner proceeding pro se in this civil rights action 16 pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 1983. Plaintiff filed this action on March 14, 2007. 17 28 U.S.C. 1915 governs proceedings in forma pauperis. Section 1915(g) provides that "[i]n 18 no event shall a prisoner bring a civil action . . . under this section if the prisoner has, on 3 or more 19 prior occasions, while incarcerated or detained in any facility, brought an action or appeal in a court 20 of the United States that was dismissed on the grounds that it is frivolous, malicious, or fails to state 21 a claim upon which relief may be granted, unless the prisoner is under imminent danger of serious 22 physical injury." A review of the actions filed by plaintiff in this district reveals that plaintiff is 23 subject to 28 U.S.C. 1915(g) and is precluded from proceeding in forma pauperis unless plaintiff 24 25 26 27 28 The Court takes judicial notice of case number 1:97-cv-06007-REC-DLB PC Lazor v. McCluskey, in w h ic h plaintiff was found to be subject to 1915(g) and in which defendants' motion to dismiss on that ground was g r a n te d on M a r c h 28, 2003. (Docs. 81, 86.) In that case, the Court counted eleven district court cases and eight a p p e lla te court cases as qualifying strikes. Three such qualifying dismissals were 2:94-cv-00421-LKK-GGH PC L a z o r v. Jakobosky, 2:94-cv-00476-LKK-JFM PC Lazor v. White, and 2:94-cv-00629-GEB-GGH PC Lazor v. 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT P. F. LAZOR, Plaintiff, v. A. HEDGPETH, et al., Defendants. CASE NO. 1:07-cv-00410-OWW-SMS PC ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF LEAVE TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS, AND REQUIRING PLAINTIFF TO PAY $350.00 FILING FEE IN FULL WITHIN THIRTY DAYS OR THIS ACTION WILL BE DISMISSED (Doc. 1) / is, at the time the complaint is filed, under imminent danger of serious physical injury.1 1 Case 1:07-cv-00410-OWW-SMS Document 3 Filed 03/21/2007 Page 2 of 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 C h u rc h . The Court has reviewed plaintiff's complaint and finds that plaintiff has alleged no facts that support a finding that he is, at this time, under imminent danger of serious physical injury. Although plaintiff alleges that he is under threat of possible death, plaintiff's complaint seeks a temporary restraining order prohibiting prison officials from administering a TB test to plaintiff on March 10,. 2007, and the basis of plaintiff's claim is that the TB test is a danger to him. Plaintiff's complaint is dated March 8, 2007, and was not received by the Court until March 14, 2007. In addition to the fact that the event plaintiff seeks to stop occurred prior to receipt of the complaint by the Court, there is no basis for concluding that the administration of a TB test constitutes imminent danger of serious physical injury, despite plaintiff's assertion to the contrary. Accordingly, plaintiff may not proceed in forma pauperis in this action, and must submit the appropriate filing fee in order to proceed with this action. Based on the foregoing, it is HEREBY ORDERED that: 1. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1915(g), plaintiff is denied leave to proceed in forma pauperis in this action; 2. Plaintiff shall pay the $350.00 filing fee in full within thirty (30) days from the date of service of this order; and 3. If plaintiff fails to pay the $350.00 filing fee in full within thirty days, this action be dismissed, without prejudice. IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: March 20, 2007 emm0d6 /s/ Oliver W. Wanger UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 2

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?