Grimes v. Wong

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

ANTHONY LEE WONG, et al.,

13

Defendants.
_________________________________

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

No. C 13-4189 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 alleges that doctors committed medical

4

malpractice in treating Plaintiff’s father in 2002. The complaint also makes a number of

5

highly implausible or unintelligible allegations. Plaintiff has been informed on numerous

6

occasions that allegations such as these do not establish imminent danger nor do they

7

state cognizable claims for relief under federal law. Therefore, it would be futile to grant

8

Plaintiff leave to 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
2

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

3

FOR THE

4

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

5
6
JEROME GRIMES,

Case Number: CV13-04189 JSW

7
Plaintiff,

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

8
v.

9
ANTHONY WONG et al,

10
Defendant.

11
12
13
14
15

/

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.

16
17

20

Jerome L. Grimes
San Francisco County Jail
1 Moreland Drive
#122233182
San Bruno, CA 94066

21

Dated: October 3, 2013

18
19

22
23
24
25
26
27
28

Richard W. Wieking, Clerk
By: Jennifer Ottolini, Deputy Clerk