Grimes v. Kelly

Filing 3

ORDER OF DISMISSAL. Signed by Judge JEFFREY S. WHITE on 2/4/16. (Attachments: # 1 Certificate/Proof of Service)(jjoS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 2/4/2016)

1
2
3
4
5

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

6
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
7
8
JEROME L. GRIMES,
9
10
11
12
13

)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
v.
)
)
)
EDWARD KELLY, et al.,
)
)
Defendants.
_________________________________ )

No. C 15-5608 JSW (PR)
ORDER OF DISMISSAL

14
Plaintiff, a jail inmate in Orlando, Florida, has filed this pro se civil rights case.
15
On May 18, 2000, this Court informed Plaintiff that under the "three-strikes" provisions
16
of 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g) he generally is ineligible to proceed in forma pauperis in federal
17
court with civil actions filed while he is incarcerated. See Grimes v. Oakland Police
18
Dept., C 00-1100 CW (Order Dismissing Complaint, 5/18/00). Since then, Plaintiff has
19
continued to file hundreds of civil rights actions seeking in forma pauperis status. With
20
respect to each action filed, the Court conducts a preliminary review to assess the nature
21
of the allegations and to determine whether Plaintiff alleges facts which bring him within
22
the “imminent danger of serious physical injury” exception to § 1915(g). In the past,
23
Plaintiff has routinely been granted leave to amend to pay the full filing fee and to state
24
cognizable claims for relief, but he has habitually failed to do so. For example, in 2003
25
alone Plaintiff's failure to comply resulted in the dismissal of approximately thirty-six
26
actions under § 1915(g).
27
In accord with this ongoing practice, the Court has reviewed the allegations in the
28

1

present action and finds that Plaintiff alleges no facts which bring him within the

2

“imminent danger” clause. As in his many prior cases, the complaint herein makes

3

highly implausible and sometimes unintelligible allegations. Plaintiff has been informed

4

on numerous occasions that allegations and claims such as these do not establish

5

imminent danger nor do they state cognizable claims for relief. Therefore, it would be

6

futile to grant Plaintiff leave to amend.

7

Accordingly, this case is DISMISSED without prejudice under § 1915(g). If

8

Plaintiff is so inclined, he may bring his claims in a new action accompanied by the

9

$400.00 filing fee. In any event, the Court will continue to review under § 1915(g) all

10

future actions filed by Plaintiff while he is incarcerated in which he seeks in forma

11

pauperis status.

12

The Clerk of the Court shall close the file and terminate all pending motions.

13

IT IS SO ORDERED.

14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

DATED: February 4, 2016
JEFFREY S. WHITE
United States District Judge