Bussie v. Fishman et al
ORDER DISMISSING CASE - Signed by Chief Judge James C. Dever III on 8/6/2014. (Tripp, S.)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA
PAUL FISHMAN, et al.,
On February 20, 2014, Anthony Bussie ("Bussie" or "plaintiff''), a federal pretrial detainee
proceeding pro se, filed this action on a form complaint seeking relief pursuant to Bivens v. Six
Unknown Named Agents of Federal Bureau ofNarcotics, 403 U.S. 388 (1971) [D.E. 1]. Bussie
seeks leave to proceed in forma pauperis [D.E. 2]. As explained below, the court dismisses the
Bussie is under criminal indictment in the United States District Court for the District of
New Jersey for threatening a member of the United States House of Representatives, in violation of
18 U.S.C. §§ 115 and 2. See United States v. Bussie, No.1 :12-CR-00229-RMB-1, [D.E. 1] (D.N.J.
Jan. 12, 2012) (criminal complaint). Bussie names as defendants the Assistant United States
Attorney assigned to prosecute his criminal case, the United States Attorney for the District ofNew
Jersey, and an "Unknown Attorney General in NJ," and challenges the criminal proceedings against
him. Compl. 3-4.
Bussie is a familiar litigant to the federal courts, having filed 86 actions in five years.
See Admin. Office of U.S. Courts, PACER Case Locator, www.pacer.gov (search "Bussie,
Anthony"). The PLRA's three-strikes provision allows the court to dismiss a prisoner's action "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 underimminentdangerofserious physical injury." 28 U.S. C.§ 1915(g); see Tolbertv. Stevenson,
635 F.3d 646,650 (4th Cir. 2011); Green v. Young, 454 F.3d 405,407-10 (4th Cir. 2006); Altizer
v. Deeds, 191 F.3d 540, 544 (4th Cir. 1999).
Bussie has filed at least three actions that courts have dismissed as frivolous or malicious.
Bussie v. Andrews, No. 5:13-CV-322-BO, [D.E. 14] (E.D.N.C. Sept. 3, 2013); Bussie v.
Braumm1, No. 3:13-cv-1055-AWT, [D.E. 5] (D. Conn. July 31, 2013); Bussie v. FEC, No.
3:13-cv-477-wmc, [D.E. 3] (W.D. Wis. July 30, 2013); Bussie v. Attorney Gen., No. 3:13cv-476-wmc, [D.E. 3] (W.D. Wis. July 30, 2013); Bussie v. Dep't of Commerce, No.
5:12-CV-792-D, [D.E. 8] (E.D.N.C. Mar. 12, 2013). Bussie also has incurred routine dismissals
pursuant to section 1915(g).
Bussie v. Boehner, No. 3:14-cv-279-D-BK, [D.E. 6] (N.D.
Tex. Feb. 28, 2014); Bussie v. Boehner, No. 5:14-CV-57-FL, [D.E. 3] (E.D.N.C. Feb. 4, 2014);
Bussie v. Andrews, No. 5:13-CV-605-F, [D.E. 4] (E.D.N.C. Oct. 16, 2013).
To avoid dismissal, Bussie must show that he is under imminent danger of serious physical
injury in order to proceed without prepayment of the filing fee. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). This
"exception [to the three-strikes rule] focuses on the risk that the conduct complained of threatens
continuing or future injury, not on whether the inmate deserves a remedy for past misconduct."
Martin v. Shelton, 319 F.3d 1048, 1050 (8th Cir. 2003). Vague, speculative, or conclusory
allegations are insufficient to invoke the exception of section 1915(g). Rather, the inmate must make
"specific fact allegations of ongoing serious physical injury, or of a pattern ofmisconduct evidencing
the likelihood of imminent serious physical injury." ld. Bussie has not made a colorable showing
that this action should proceed under the exception to the three-strikes rule.
In sum, the court DISMISSES plaintiff's action under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). The clerk shall
close the case.
day of August 2014.
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?