Dupree, Jr. v. Intel Satellite Organization

Filing 4

ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Carolyn K. Delaney on 4/27/2017 DENYING 2 Motion to Proceed IFP. Plaintiff to pay the $400 filing fee no later than 14 days from the date of this order. (Henshaw, R)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

RICHARD JOSE DUPREE, JR.,

12
13
14

No. 2:17-cv-0803 CKD P

Plaintiff,
v.

ORDER

INTEL SATELLITE ORGANIZATION,

15

Defendant.

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

[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).

28
1

1

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

2

U.S.C. § 1915(g). Dupree v. U. S. Copyright Office, No. 2:11-cv-1700 WBS KJN, Order dated

3

July 28, 2011 (adopting June 30, 2011 findings and recommendations and deeming dismissal for

4

frivolousness plaintiff’s third strike). The court takes judicial notice of the two other cases

5

identified therein as § 1915(g) strikes against plaintiff, which were dismissed as frivolous or for

6

failure to state a claim.1

7

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

8

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

9

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

10

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

11

danger of serious physical injury” under § 1915(g).

12
13

In light of the above, plaintiff will be granted fourteen days to pay the filing fee in this
action; otherwise, it will be dismissed.

14

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

15

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

16

2. 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: April 27, 2017

_____________________________________
CAROLYN K. DELANEY
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

19
20
21
22
23
24

2 / dupr0803.threestrikes

25
26
27
28

1

Dupree v. United States District Court, No. 2:11-cv-0263 DAD (ECF No. 10); Dupree v.
Santiago, et al., No. 2:11-cv-0309 EFB (ECF No. 7).
2