Hubbard v. Gipson et al

Filing 6

ORDER Revoking Plaintiff's in Forma Pauperis Status under 28 USC 1915(g); ORDER Vacating Order of May 28, 2014; ORDER Dismissing Action without Prejudice to Re-Filing with Payment of $400.00 Filing Fee in Full; ORDER for Clerk to Serve this Order on CDCR and Financial Department, signed by Magistrate Judge Dennis L. Beck on 1/30/15. CASE CLOSED. (Verduzco, M)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

ZANE HUBBARD,

12

Plaintiff,

13
v.

ORDER REVOKING PLAINTIFF’S IN
FORMA PAUPERIS STATUS UNDER 28
U.S.C. § 1915(g)
ORDER VACATING ORDER OF
MAY 28, 2014
(ECF No. 4)

14
15
M. GIPSON, et al.,
16
Defendants.
17

Case No. 1:14-cv-00748 DLB PC

ORDER DISMISSING ACTION WITHOUT
PREJUDICE TO RE-FILING WITH
PAYMENT OF $400.00 FILING FEE IN FULL
ORDER FOR CLERK TO SERVE THIS
ORDER ON CDCR AND FINANCIAL
DEPARTMENT

18
19
20

Plaintiff Zane Hubbard (“Plaintiff”), a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma

21
22
23
24

pauperis, filed this civil rights action on May 19, 2014.1 On May 28, 2014, the Court granted
Plaintiff’s application to proceed in forma pauperis.
A.

THREE-STRIKES PROVISION OF 28 U.S.C. § 1915
28 U.S.C. ' 1915 governs proceedings in forma pauperis. Section 1915(g) provides that A[i]n

25
no event shall a prisoner bring a civil action . . . under this section if the prisoner has, on 3 or more
26

prior occasions, while incarcerated or detained in any facility, brought an action or appeal in a court

27
28

1

On June 9, 2014, Plaintiff consented to the jurisdiction of the Magistrate Judge.

1

1
2

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

3

physical injury.@ 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g).

4

B.

5

DISCUSSION
A review of the actions filed by Plaintiff reveals that he is subject to 28 U.S.C. ' 1915(g) and

6

is precluded from proceeding in forma pauperis unless he was, at the time the Complaint was filed,

7

under imminent danger of serious physical injury.2

8

The Court has reviewed Plaintiff=s Complaint and finds that he does not meet the imminent

9

danger exception. See Andrews v. Cervantes, 493 F.3d 1047, 1053 (9th Cir. 2007). Plaintiff names

10

as Defendants: Correctional Officers M. Gipson, M. Gonzalez, D. Gonzalez, Perez, De Ochoa, and

11

Sgt. Aceves; Bakersfield Police Officers Urbery, Beagley, and Bender; Kern County Sheriff

12

Deputies Ashley, Jennings, Gilmoore, Peatris, Miller, and Hall; Nurse Woods; and Television News

13
14
15
16

Reporter Graciela Moreno. Plaintiff complains that all Defendants continue to threaten to kidnap
him, rape him, extort him, sodomize him, and request that he become a prison gang member. He
complains that they are attempting to intimidate him because he is a Mexican gang member with
tattoos. He alleges they are attempting to make him a homosexual. He claims he is falsely
convicted and falsely confined.

17
Plaintiff fails to allege specific facts in the Complaint indicating that he was under imminent
18
19
20
21
22

danger at the time he filed the complaint. Plaintiff makes sweeping, implausible claims without any
foundation. Based on the foregoing, the Court finds that Plaintiff fails to allege the imminent danger
of serious physical injury necessary to bypass ' 1915(g)’s restriction on filing suit without
prepayment of the filing fee.
Accordingly, Plaintiff may not proceed in forma pauperis in this action. Plaintiff’s in forma

23

pauperis status shall be revoked, and the case will be dismissed without prejudice to Plaintiff refiling

24

with full payment of the $400.00 filing fee.3

25
26
27
28

2

The Court takes judicial notice of the following cases which count as strikes: 1:13-cv-00761-MJS-PC (ED
Cal.) Hubbard v. CDCR, et al. (dismissed on 08/30/2013 for failure to state a claim); 1:13-cv-01078-LJO-MJS-PC (ED
Cal.) Hubbard v. Mendes, et al. (dismissed on 03/17/2014 for failure to state a claim); and 1:14-cv-00351-LJO-SAB-PC
(ED Cal.) Hubbard v. Lua, et al. (dismissed on 05/06/2014 for failure to state a claim)

2

1
2

C.

CONCLUSION
Based on the foregoing, it is HEREBY ORDERED that:

3

1.

Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. ' 1915(g), Plaintiff’s in forma pauperis status is REVOKED;

4

2.

The Court’s order entered on May 28, 2014, which granted Plaintiff leave to proceed

5

in forma pauperis and directed the CDCR to make payments for the filing fee from

6

Plaintiff’s prison trust account, is VACATED;

7

3.

payment of the $400.00 filing fee;

8
9

The case is DISMISSED, without prejudice, to Plaintiff re-filing the action with full

4.

The Clerk is directed to serve a copy of this order on:
(1)

10

(CM/ECF), and

11
(2)

12

the Financial Department, U.S. District Court, Eastern District of California,
Fresno Division.

13
14

the Director of the CDCR, via the Court’s electronic case filing system

IT IS SO ORDERED.

15
16

Dated:

/s/ Dennis

January 30, 2015

L. Beck

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

3

To date, the Court has not received any payment for Plaintiff’s filing fee in this case. The filing fee for this
action is $350.00 plus a $50.00 administrative fee. 28 U.S.C. § 1914. The $50.00 administrative fee does not apply to
persons granted in forma pauperis status. Id. Therefore, Plaintiff now owes a $400.00 filing fee.

3