Cramer v. Coney et al

Filing 3

ORDER DISMISSING CASE without prejudice to re-filing accompanied by the $400.00 Filing Fee; Clerk to enter Judgment; ORDER DENYING 2 Motion to Proceed IFP, signed by District Judge Lawrence J. O'Neill on 03/12/2016. CASE CLOSED(Martin-Gill, S)

1
2
3
4
5
6

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

8
9

MATTHEW B. CRAMER,

10
11
12
13

Plaintiff,
vs.
CAROL L. CONEY, et al.,
Defendants.

14

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

1:16-cv-00321-LJO-BAM
ORDER (1) DENYING MOTION FOR
LEAVE TO PROCEED IN FORMA
PAUPERIS, (2) DISMISSING ACTION
WITHOUT PREJUDICE PURSUANT TO 28
U.S.C. § 1915(g), AND (3) DIRECTING
CLERK OF COURT TO ENTER
JUDGMENT
(ECF Nos. 1 and 2)

15
16

Plaintiff Matthew B. Cramer, a pre-trial detainee proceeding pro se, filed this civil action

17

on March 4, 2016. Plaintiff seeks leave to proceed in forma pauperis pursuant to 28 U.S.C.

18

§1915. (Doc. 2).

19

Plaintiff is subject to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g), which provides that “[i]n no event shall a

20

prisoner bring a civil action . . . under this section if the prisoner has, on 3 or more prior

21

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

22

the United States that was dismissed on the grounds that it is frivolous, malicious, or fails to state

23

a claim upon which relief may be granted, unless the prisoner is under imminent danger of

24

serious physical injury.”

25

The Court takes judicial notice of the following Eastern District of California cases:

26

Cramer v. Schwarzenegger, case number 1:08-cv-01310-GSA (dismissed April 24, 2009, for

27

failure to state a claim; no appeal filed); Cramer v. Calif. Dep’t of Justice, 2:00-cv-02374-DFL-

28
1

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19

DAD (dismissed Sept. 26, 2001, for failure to state a claim and frivolous; no appeal filed); and
Cramer v. Ty Warner, Inc., 2:00-mc-00099-FCD-GGH (dismissed Jul. 26, 2001, for failure to
state a claim; no appeal filed). Accordingly, prior to the date he filed this action, Plaintiff had at
least three strikes under section 1915(g), and he is precluded from proceeding in forma pauperis
unless, at the time he filed suit, he was in imminent danger of serious physical injury. Andrews
v. Cervantes, 493 F.3d 1047, 1055-56 (9th Cir. 2007).
Plaintiff is currently housed at the Bob Wiley Detention Facility in Visalia, California.
Plaintiff’s allegations do not demonstrate that he is under imminent danger of serious physical
injury. Rather, Plaintiff’s complaint concerns allegations of interference with his religious
freedom, hate crimes and past death threats involving private actors. These individuals do not
appear to be housed with Plaintiff at the Bob Wiley Detention Facility, and there is no assertion
that he is under imminent danger of serious physical injury. (Doc. 1). Therefore, Plaintiff must
pay the $400.00 filing fee if he wishes to litigate this action. See, e.g., Cramer v. Wittman, Case
No. 1:13-cv-00451-LJO-SKO (action brought by Matthew B. Cramer while housed at Bob Wiley
Detention Facility dismissed without prejudice pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1916(g) on March 29,
2013; no appeal filed).
Accordingly, the Court HEREBY ORDERS as follows:
1. Plaintiff’s motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis in this action is DENIED;
2. This action is DISMISSED without prejudice to re-filing accompanied by the $400.00
filing fee; and

20
21

3. The Clerk of the Court shall enter judgment.

22
23
24
25

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

/s/ Lawrence J. O’Neill

March 12, 2016

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

26
27
28
2