GILLILAN v. AKINS
ORDER DENYING Plaintiff's motion to proceed in forma pauperis and DISMISSING WITHOUT PREJUDICE 1 Complaint filed by GREGORY LINSTON GILLILAN. Ordered by Judge Marc Thomas Treadwell on 9/22/2011. (tlh)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
Prison Guard AKINS,
NO. 5:11-CV-379 (MTT)
Plaintiff GREGORY GILLILAN, presently an inmate at Wheeler Correctional
Facility (“WCF”) in Alamo, Georgia, has filed a pro se civil rights complaint under 42
U.S.C. § 1983. Parties instituting non-habeas civil actions are required to pay a filing
fee of $350.00, unless they qualify for in forma pauperis status. 28 U.S.C. §§ 1914(a),
1915. Because Plaintiff has failed to pay the required filing fee, the Court assumes that
he wishes to proceed in forma pauperis in this action.
Plaintiff’s sole named Defendant is WCF Prison Guard Akins. According to
Plaintiff, Akins threatens to lock Plaintiff down and has apparently written disciplinary
reports on Plaintiff in retaliation for his filing lawsuits.
Under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g), the “three strikes rule” of the Prison Litigation Reform
Act, a prisoner may not bring an in forma pauperis civil action or appeal:
if the prisoner has, on 3 or more prior occasions, while
incarcerated or detained in any facility, brought an action or
appeal in a court of the United States that was dismissed on
the grounds that it is frivolous, malicious, or fails to state a
claim upon which relief may be granted, unless the prisoner
is under imminent danger of serious physical injury.
28 U.S.C. § 1915(g).
A review of court records reveals that Plaintiff has filed more than 162 civil
actions in the United States District Courts, and at least 11 of those complaints or
resulting appeals have been dismissed as frivolous, malicious, or failing to state a claim.
See Gillilan v. Davis, 5:11-cv-208 (MTT) (M.D. Ga. May 31, 2011) (listing cases).
Plaintiff’s allegations clearly do not satisfy the “imminent danger of serious physical
injury” exception. Plaintiff’s motion to proceed in forma pauperis is therefore DENIED.
Additionally, venue in this district is improper. The venue provision of 28 U.S.C.
§ 1391(b) provides in relevant part:
A civil action wherein jurisdiction is not founded solely on
diversity of citizenship may ... be brought only in (1) a judicial
district where any defendant resides, if all defendants reside
in the same state, [or] (2) a judicial district in which a
substantial part of the events or omissions giving rise to the
28 U.S.C. § 1391(b).
The Defendant appears to be located, and all of the events alleged in the
complaint occurred, in Wheeler County, which is situated in the Southern District of
Georgia. 28 U.S.C. § 90(c)(2). As this Court has informed Plaintiff in prior orders, the
proper venue for actions arising out of WCF is the Southern District of Georgia, not this
Title 28 U.S.C. § 1406(a) provides that a district court may transfer a case to
another court where it might have been properly filed. However, the court should
transfer the case only if doing so is in the interest of justice. A transfer of this case
would not be in the interests of justice because
Plaintiff has more than three strikes and has failed to allege sufficient facts to indicate
that he is in “imminent danger of serious physical injury.”
In light of the foregoing, the instant action is hereby DISMISSED WITHOUT
SO ORDERED, this 22nd day of September, 2011.
S/ Marc T. Treadwell
MARC T. TREADWELL, JUDGE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
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?