Grimes v. Agoo

Filing 4

ORDER OF DISMISSAL; DENYING 3 MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma. Signed by Judge JEFFREY S. WHITE on 2/4/16. (Attachments: # 1 Certificate/Proof of Service)(jjoS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 2/4/2016)

Download PDF
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. ) ) ) MS. AGOO, et al., ) ) Defendants. _________________________________ ) No. C 15-5618 JSW (PR) ORDER OF DISMISSAL; DENYING LEAVE TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS (Dkt. No. 3) 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, the application for leave to proceed in forma pauperis is DENIED 8 and this case is DISMISSED without prejudice under § 1915(g). If Plaintiff is so 9 inclined, he may bring his claims in a new action accompanied by the $400.00 filing fee. 10 In any event, the Court will continue to review under § 1915(g) all future actions filed by 11 Plaintiff while he is incarcerated in which he seeks in forma 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

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?