Stewart Manago v. Gonzalez et al
Filing
18
ORDER Requesting Remand After an Indicative Ruling Per Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 12.1 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 ; ORDER Directing Clerk's Office to Serve This Order on Appellate Court, signed by Chief Judge Anthony W. Ishii on 4/11/12. (Gonzalez, R)
1
2
3
4
5
6
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
7
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
8
9
STEWART MANAGO,
10
11
12
USDC CASE NO. 1:11-cv-01269-GBC PC
Plaintiff,
USCA CASE NO. 12-15497
v.
ORDER REQUESTING REMAND AFTER AN
INDICATIVE RULING PER FEDERAL RULE
OF APPELLATE PROCEDURE 12.1
GONZALEZ, et al.,
13
Defendants.
(Docs. 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14)
14
ORDER DIRECTING CLERK’S OFFICE TO
SERVE THIS ORDER ON APPELLATE
COURT
15
16
/
17
Plaintiff Stewart Manago is a state prisoner who was proceeding pro se in this civil rights
18
action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
19
On December 22, 2012, an order issued revoking Plaintiff’s in forma pauperis status pursuant
20
to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g) finding that Plaintiff already had accumulated three strikes under that section
21
and failed to state allegations sufficient to meet the exception of showing that he was in imminent
22
danger of serious physical injury. (Doc. 9.) On December 22, 2011 and December 30, 2011,
23
Plaintiff filed for reconsideration of that order. (Docs. 10, 11.) Both of these requests for
24
reconsideration were denied, the case was closed, and judgment was entered. (Docs. 12, 13.)
25
Plaintiff appealed both the order denying reconsideration which dismissed the action and the entry
26
of judgment. (Doc. 14.) This appeal is currently pending before the Unites States Court of Appeals
27
for the Ninth Circuit.
28
1
1
Reconsideration of the order revoking Plaintiff’s in forma pauperis status is appropriate and
2
should be granted since Plaintiff’s allegations (that he was wrongly validated as a Black Gorilla
3
Family member when he is in fact a long-time member of Project Watts Crips and that these are
4
documented enemies in the California Department of Rehabilitation and Corrections) meet the
5
imminent danger exception to section 1915(g).
6
Given Plaintiff’s allegations of imminent danger, the Court HEREBY REQUESTS for the
7
Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals to dismiss Plaintiff’s current appeal, without retaining jurisdiction,
8
and remand this case under Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 12.1(b) and to grant leave to the
9
undersigned court to grant relief from the judgment entered, pursuant Federal Rules of Civil
10
11
Procedure Rule 60, for further proceedings to be conducted in this case.
Further, the Court HEREBY DIRECTS the Clerk of the Court to serve a copy of this
12
order on the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals.
13
IT IS SO ORDERED.
14
15
Dated:
0m8i78
April 11, 2012
CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
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?