Blackwell v. Taxdahl et al

Filing 11

ORDER Dismissing Action, Without Prejudice, Pursuant to 28 USC 1915(G), signed by District Judge Lawrence J. O'Neill on 12/3/2009. CASE CLOSED. (Sondheim, M)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Plaintiff Rodney Blackwell, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, filed this civil rights action 16 pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 on April 10, 2009, and Plaintiff was granted leave to proceed in forma 17 pauperis on May 6, 2009. On September 14, 2009, the Court issued an order finding that Plaintiff 18 was precluded from proceeding in forma pauperis in this action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g), 19 vacating its order granting Plaintiff leave to proceed in forma pauperis, and ordering Plaintiff to pay 20 21 filing fee, this action would be dismissed. 22 /// 23 24 25 26 27 28
Section 1915(g) provides that "[i]n no event shall a prisoner bring a civil action . . . under this section if th e prisoner has, on 3 or more prior occasions, while incarcerated or detained in any facility, brought an action or a p p e a l 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." The following cases support the Court's finding that Plaintiff became subject to section 1915(g) prior to the d a te he filed this action: 2:05-cv-01743-UA-MAN Blackwell v. Los Angeles County, et al. (C.D. Cal.) (dismissed 0 4 /0 4 /2 0 0 5 as for failure to state a claim); 2:08-cv-00791-UA-AGR Blackwell v. Glick (C.D. Cal.) (dismissed 0 4 /2 8 /2 0 0 8 for failure to state a claim); and 2:08-cv-05750-UA-AGR Blackwell v. York (C.D. Cal.) (dismissed 1 0 /0 6 /2 0 0 8 for failure to state a claim).
1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

RODNEY BLACKWELL, Plaintiff, v. D. TAXDAHL, et al., Defendants. /

CASE NO. 1:09-cv-00642-LJO-GSA PC ORDER DISMISSING ACTION, WITHOUT PREJUDICE, PURSUANT TO 28 U.S.C. § 1915(G) (Doc. 10)

the $350.00 filing fee in full within thirty days.1 Plaintiff was warned that if he failed to pay the

1

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

More than thirty days have passed and Plaintiff has not paid the filing fee or otherwise responded to the Court's order. Accordingly, this action is HEREBY DISMISSED, without prejudice, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915g).

IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: b9ed48 December 3, 2009 /s/ Lawrence J. O'Neill UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

2