Stephen v. Fox et al

Filing 7

ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Carolyn K. Delaney on 1/26/17 granting 5 Motion to Amend and denying 2 Motion to Proceed IFP. Plaintiff shall pay the $400 filing fee no later than fourteen days from the date of this order. (Plummer, M)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

JIMMIE STEPHEN,

12

No. 2:16-cv-2574 CKD P

Plaintiff,

13

v.

14

R. W. FOX, et al.,

15

ORDER

Defendants.

16
17

Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed a civil rights action pursuant to 42

18

U.S.C. § 1983 along with an application to proceed in forma pauperis. See 28 U.S.C. §§ 1914(a),

19

1915(a).

20

28 U.S.C. § 1915 permits any court of the United States to authorize the commencement

21

and prosecution of any suit without prepayment of fees by a person who submits an affidavit

22

indicating that the person is unable to pay such fees. However,

23
24
25
26
27
28

[i]n no event shall a prisoner bring a civil action or appeal a
judgment in a civil action or proceeding under this section if the
prisoner has, on 3 or more prior occasions, while incarcerated or
detained in any facility, brought an action or appeal 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.
28 U.S.C. § 1915(g).
1

1

Court records indicate that plaintiff has been deemed a “Three Strikes” inmate under 28

2

U.S.C. § 1915(g). Stephen v. Zhang, No. 2:12-cv-630 GGH P (E.D. Cal.), ECF No. 5. The court

3

takes judicial notice of the six cases identified therein as § 1915(g) strikes, all of which were

4

dismissed for frivolousness or failure to state a claim. See also Stephen v. Hernandez, No. 08-cv-

5

0750 BEN (BLM) (identifying plaintiff as three-strikes litigant).

6

The imminent danger applies only if it is clear that the danger existed when the complaint

7

was filed. Andrews v. Cervantes, 493 F.3d 1047, 1053 (9th Cir. 2007). Allegations of imminent

8

danger that are overly speculative or fanciful may be rejected. Id. at 1057, n.11. Having

9

reviewed the complaint, the undersigned finds that plaintiff has not credibly alleged “imminent

10
11
12

danger of serious physical injury” under § 1915(g).
In light of the above, plaintiff will be granted fourteen days to pay the filing fee in this
action; otherwise, it will be dismissed.

13

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

14

1. Plaintiff’s motion to amend (ECF No. 5) is granted;

15

2. Plaintiff’s motion to proceed in forma pauperis (ECF No. 2) is denied; and

16

3. Plaintiff shall pay the $400 filing fee no later than fourteen days from the date of this

17

order. Failure to comply with this order will result in dismissal of this action.

18

Dated: January 26, 2017

_____________________________________
CAROLYN K. DELANEY
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

19
20
21
22
23
24

2 / step2574.threestrikes

25
26
27
28
2