CARROLL v. DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

Filing 4

MEMORANDUM OPINION Signed by Judge Reggie B. Walton on 3/23/09. (mmh, )

Download PDF
FILED UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA NANCY MAYER WHITIINGTON. CLERK U.S. DISTRICT COURT WESLEY CARROLL, Plaintiff, v. DEP ARTMENT OF THE NAVY, Defendant. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Civil Action No. 09-0077 (UNA) MEMORANDUM OPINION Under the Prison Litigation Reform Act ("PLRA"), a prisoner may not proceed in forma pauperis if while incarcerated he has filed at least three prior cases that were dismissed as frivolous, malicious, or for failure to state a claim. 28 U.S.C. 1915(g); see Ibrahim v. District of Columbia, 463 F.3d 3, 6 (D.C. Cir. 2006); Ibrahim v. District of Columbia, 208 F.3d 1032, 1033 (D.C. Cir. 2000); Smith v. District of Columbia, 182 F.3d 25,29 (D.C. Cir. 1999). There is an exception for a prisoner who shows that he "is under imminent danger of serious physical injury" at the time he files suit. 28 U.S.C. 1915(g). Plaintiff is not eligible to proceed informa pauperis because he has accumulated more than "three strikes" for purposes of the PLRA. See, e.g., Carroll v. Clerk of Court, No. 08-1684, 2009 WL 112546, at *1 (W.D. Pa. Jan. 15,2009) (denying motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis under 28 U.S.c. 1915(g) and dismissing complaint without prejudice to re-filing after payment of the filing fee). Moreover, review of the complaint reveals that plaintiff brings this action against the Department of the Navy under the Freedom of Information Act, see 5 U.S.c. 552, and nothing in the pleading suggests that plaintiff is in imminent danger of serious physical injury. Absent such an allegation, plaintiff does not overcome the bar imposed by Section 1915(g). Accordingly, the Court denies plaintiff s motion to proceed in forma pauperis and dismisses this action under 28 U.S.C. 1915(g).

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?