Scott v. Unknown

Filing 7

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER that this matter is dismissed without prejudice. A separate judgment will be entered in accordance with this Memorandum and Order. Ordered by Judge Joseph F. Bataillon. (Copy mailed to pro se party) (JSF)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEBRASKA
MICHAEL SCOTT,

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Plaintiff,
v.
UNKNOWN,
Defendant.

8:13CV288

MEMORANDUM
AND ORDER

This matter is before the court on its own motion. On October 8, 2013, the court
required Plaintiff to show cause why he is entitled to proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP”)
pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. §1915(g) (“§ 1915(g)”). (Filing No. 6.) Plaintiff did
not file a response to the court’s Memorandum and Order and, as set forth below, this matter
is dismissed.
I.

BACKGROUND

On September 12, 2013, while incarcerated, Plaintiff filed a Complaint (filing no. 1)
and a Motion for Leave to Proceed IFP (filing no. 2). On October 8, 2013, the court
determined that Plaintiff is a three-strikes litigant who filed at least three prior actions that
were dismissed as frivolous, malicious, or for failure to state a claim upon which relief may
be granted. (Filing No. 6.) See also Scott v. Stephens, et al., No. 2:06cv108 (S.D. Tex. Mar.
17, 2006) (order granting plaintiff’s motion to proceed in forma pauperis, subject to
sanctions); Scott v. Bush, et al., No. 6:97cv005 (E.D. Tex. May 12, 1997); Scott v. Layton,
et al., No. 6:97cv332 (E.D. Tex. Mar. 5 1998); Scott v. Hunter, et al., No. 1:99cv003 (N.D.
Tex. Jan. 11, 2000); Scott v. Groomer, et al., No. 2:02cv126 (N.D. Tex. 2002); Scott v.
Groomer, No. 03-10433 (5th Cir. Oct. 22, 2003).
Because Plaintiff is a three-strikes litigant, the court ordered Plaintiff to either show
cause why he is entitled to proceed IFP or pay the full $350 filing fee, or his case would be
dismissed. (Filing No. 6.) Plaintiff did not file a response to the court’s October 8, 2013,
Memorandum and Order, and has taken no other action in this matter. (See Docket Sheet.)

II.

ANALYSIS

A prisoner may not bring a civil action and proceed IFP if the prisoner has, on three
or more occasions, while incarcerated, brought an action or appeal in federal court that was
dismissed on the grounds that it was frivolous, malicious, or failed to state a claim upon
which relief may be granted. § 1915(g). An exception is made for prisoners who are under
imminent danger of serious physical injury. Id.
In its previous Memorandum and Order, the court ordered Plaintiff to show cause why
his case should not be dismissed pursuant to § 1915(g). (Filing No. 6.) Plaintiff did not
respond to the court’s October 8, 2013, Memorandum and Order. (See Docket Sheet.) Thus,
Plaintiff has not shown that he faces any imminent danger of serious physical injury. In light
of this, Plaintiff is not entitled to proceed IFP, nor has he paid the full $350 filing fee. For
these reasons, this matter must be dismissed.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that:
1.

This matter is dismissed without prejudice.

2.

A separate judgment will be entered in accordance with this Memorandum and

Order.
DATED this 13th day of November, 2013.
BY THE COURT:
s/ Joseph F. Bataillon
United States District Judge

*This opinion may contain hyperlinks to other documents or Web sites. The U.S. District Court for
the District of Nebraska does not endorse, recommend, approve, or guarantee any third parties or the services
or products they provide on their Web sites. Likewise, the court has no agreements with any of these third
parties or their Web sites. The court accepts no responsibility for the availability or functionality of any
hyperlink. Thus, the fact that a hyperlink ceases to work or directs the user to some other site does not affect
the opinion of the court.

2