Pellum v. Fresno Federal Courthouse et al

Filing 9

ORDER Dismissing Action, Without Prejudice, Pursuant to 28 USC 1915(G), signed by District Judge Anthony W. Ishii on 02/12/15. CASE CLOSED.(Gonzalez, R)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

8

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

9
JASON E. PELLUM, SR.,

10

Plaintiff,

11
v.

12

FEDERAL JUDGE LAWRENCE J.
O’NEILL, et al.,

13

Case No. 1:15-cv-00120 AWI DLB (PC)
ORDER DISMISSING ACTION, WITHOUT
PREJUDICE, PURSUANT TO 28 U.S.C. §
1915(G)
(Doc. 1)

14
Defendants.
15
_____________________________________/
16
Plaintiff Jason E. Pellum, Sr., a state prisoner proceeding pro se, filed this civil rights

17

18 action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 on January 9, 2015. Plaintiff is subject to 28 U.S.C. §
19 1915(g), which provides that “[i]n no event shall a prisoner bring a civil action . . . under this
20 section if the prisoner has, on 3 or more prior occasions, while incarcerated or detained in any
21 facility, brought an action or appeal in a court of the United States that was dismissed on the
22 grounds that it is frivolous, malicious, or fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted,
1
23 unless the prisoner is under imminent danger of serious physical injury.”

24
25
26
27
28

1

Plaintiff has at least three dismissals which qualify as final strikes under section 1915(g). Silva v. Di Vittorio, 658
F.3d 1090, 1098-99 (9th Cir. 2011). The Court takes judicial notice of the following United States District Court
cases: Pellum v. Fresno Police Dept., 1:10-cv-1258-OWW-SKO (E.D.Cal.) (dismissed for failure to state a claim on
Mar. 7, 2011); Pellum v. The White House, 2:13-cv-0651-AC (E.D.Cal.) (dismissed as frivolous on April 26, 2013);
Pellum v. Skiles, 1:14-cv-1082-MJS (E.D.Cal.) (dismissed for failure to state a claim on July 22, 2014).

The Court has reviewed Plaintiff’s complaint and his allegations do not satisfy the

1

2 imminent danger exception to section 1915(g).2 Andrews v. Cervantes, 493 F.3d 1047, 1055-56
3 (9th Cir. 2007). If Plaintiff wishes to pursue this action, he must first pay the $400.00 filing fee.
4

Accordingly, the Court HEREBY ORDERS that this action is DISMISSED, without

5 prejudice to re-filing accompanied by the $400.00 filing fee.
6
7

IT IS SO ORDERED.

8 Dated: February 12, 2015

SENIOR DISTRICT JUDGE

9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

2

Plaintiff is currently incarcerated at Fresno County Jail, and his allegations concern judicial decisions in a state court
case. His complaint presents no allegations that he is under imminent danger of serious physical injury.

2