Smith v. Anderson, et al

Filing 6

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER denying 2 petition to proceed in forma pauperis, as plaintiff has three strikes. Plaintiff shall pay $350 filing fee within 15 days. Signed by Judge Michael J. Reagan on 12/23/08. (eed)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS MILTON SMITH, Inmate #A-81091, Plaintiff, vs. THOMAS E. ANDERSON, et al., Defendants. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CIVIL NO. 08-cv-883-MJR MEMORANDUM AND ORDER REAGAN, District Judge: Plaintiff has filed a pro se civil rights complaint pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, along with a motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915. However, Plaintiff is well aware that he has had three or more prior prisoner actions dismissed on the grounds that they were frivolous, malicious, or failed to state a claim upon which relief may be granted.1 Further, the allegations in the instant complaint do not show that Plaintiff is under imminent danger of serious physical injury. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis is DENIED. Plaintiff shall pay the full filing fee of $350 for this action within FIFTEEN (15) DAYS of the entry of this Order. If Plaintiff does not comply with this Order in the time allotted, this case will be closed for failure to comply with an order of this Court. FED.R.CIV.P. 41(b); see generally Ladien v. Astrachan, 128 F.3d 1051 (7th Cir. 1997); Johnson v. Kamminga, 34 F.3d 466 (7th Cir. 1994). IT IS SO ORDERED. DATED this 23rd day of December, 2008. s/ Michael J. Reagan MICHAEL J. REAGAN United States District Judge See, e.g., Smith v. Strubb, Case No. 92-3751 (7th Cir., filed Nov. 16, 1992); Smith v. Peters, Case No. 95-cv-432-WDS (S.D. Ill., filed May 25, 1995); Smith v. Edgar, Case No. 97-cv-117-JPG (S.D. Ill., filed Feb. 12, 1997); Smith v. Welborn, Case No. 99-cv-494-GPM (S.D. Ill., filed July 13, 1999). 1

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?