Grimes v. Gentry
Filing
5
ORDER OF DISMISSAL. Signed by Judge Jeffrey S. White on 10/3/13. (jjoS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 10/3/2013)
1
2
3
4
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
5
6
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
7
8
JEROME L. GRIMES,
9
Plaintiff,
10
v.
11
12
GENTRY, et al.,
13
Defendants.
_________________________________
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
No. C 13-4045 JSW (PR)
ORDER OF DISMISSAL
(Docket No. 2, 4)
14
15
Plaintiff, an inmate in the San Francisco County Jail and frequent litigator in this
16
Court, has recently filed this pro se civil rights case. On May 18, 2000, this Court
17
informed Plaintiff that under the "three-strikes" provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g) he
18
generally is ineligible to proceed in forma pauperis in federal court with civil actions
19
filed while he is incarcerated. See Grimes v. Oakland Police Dept., C 00-1100 CW
20
(Order Dismissing Complaint, 5/18/00). Since then, Plaintiff has continued to file
21
hundreds of civil rights actions seeking in forma pauperis status. With respect to each
22
action filed, the Court conducts a preliminary review to assess the nature of the
23
allegations and to determine whether Plaintiff alleges facts which bring him within the
24
"imminent danger of serious physical injury" exception to § 1915(g). In the past,
25
Plaintiff has routinely been granted leave to amend to pay the full filing fee and to state
26
cognizable claims for relief, but he has habitually failed to do so. For example, in 2003
27
alone Plaintiff's failure to comply resulted in the dismissal of approximately thirty-six
28
actions under § 1915(g).
1
In accord with this ongoing practice, the Court has reviewed the allegations in the
2
present action and finds that Plaintiff alleges no facts which bring him within the
3
"imminent danger" clause. The complaint makes a number of highly implausible or
4
unintelligible allegations, such as “food chain terror” and “dirty bomb pinch of
5
risin/miningitis/super bug bacillius/hair mange/etc..” On numerous occasions, Plaintiff
6
has been informed that allegations such as these neither establish imminent danger nor
7
state cognizable claims for relief. Therefore, it would be futile to grant Plaintiff leave to
8
amend.
9
Accordingly, this case is DISMISSED without prejudice under § 1915(g). The
10
application to proceed in forma pauperis is DENIED. No fee is due. If Plaintiff is so
11
inclined, he may bring his claims in a new action accompanied by the $400.00 filing fee.
12
In any event, the Court will continue to review under § 1915(g) all future actions filed by
13
Plaintiff while he is incarcerated in which he seeks in forma pauperis status.
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
The Clerk of the Court shall close the files and terminate all pending motions in
the cases listed in the caption of this order.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATED: October 3, 2013
JEFFREY S. WHITE
United States District Judge
1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
2
FOR THE
3
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
4
5
JEROME L GRIMES,
Case Number: CV13-04045 JSW
6
Plaintiff,
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
7
v.
8
GENTRY et al,
9
Defendant.
10
11
12
13
14
/
I, the undersigned, hereby certify that I am an employee in the Office of the Clerk, U.S. District
Court, Northern District of California.
That on October 3, 2013, I SERVED a true and correct copy(ies) of the attached, by placing said
copy(ies) in a postage paid envelope addressed to the person(s) hereinafter listed, by depositing
said envelope in the U.S. Mail, or by placing said copy(ies) into an inter-office delivery
receptacle located in the Clerk's office.
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Jerome L. Grimes
1 Moreland Drive
#13672741 #408761
San Bruno, CA 94066
Dated: October 3, 2013
Richard W. Wieking, Clerk
By: Jennifer Ottolini, Deputy Clerk
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?