Moshir v. United States Postal Service et al

Filing 8

Memorandum Opinion and Order denying 2 plaintiff's motion to proceed in forma pauperis, and this action is dismissed without prejudice. If Plaintiff wishes to proceed with this action, he must, within thirty (30) days from the dat e of this Order, pay the entire filing fee of $400.00. No other documents will be accepted for filing unless Plaintiff pays the filing fee in full. If Plaintiff does not pay the full filing fee within thirty (30) days, this case will be dismissed with prejudice. The Court certifies, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3), that an appeal from this decision could not be taken in good faith. Judge Benita Y. Pearson on 11/28/2017(C,KA)

PEARSON, J.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO
EASTERN DIVISION
ALI MOSHIR,
Plaintiff,
v.

UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE, et
al.,

Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

CASE NO. 4:17CV1460

JUDGE BENITA Y. PEARSON

MEMORANDUM OF OPINION AND
ORDER

This case has been transferred from the United States District Court for the Western
District of New York. See Decision and Order (ECF No. 4). Pro se Plaintiff Ali Moshir, an
inmate at the Northeast Ohio Correctional Center (“NEOCC”) at the time he filed this in forma
pauperis civil rights action against Defendants United States Postal Service, the United States
Government, NEOCC, NEOCC Mail Clerk Madam Slattery, Corrections Corporation of
America (“CCA”)/Core Civic, and the United States Marshal Service, alleges in his Complaint
(ECF No. 1) that a certified mail letter he placed in the NEOCC mail was not delivered. Plaintiff
seeks five hundred million dollars in damages. Id.
Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g), a prisoner may not proceed in forma pauperis if the
prisoner, on three or more prior occasions while incarcerated, brought a civil action that was
dismissed on the grounds that it was frivolous, malicious, or failed to state a claim on which

(4:17CV1460)
relief could be granted, absent allegations suggesting that he is in imminent danger of serious
physical injury. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). Although the Sixth Circuit has not offered a precise
definition of “imminent danger,” it has suggested that the threat of serious physical injury “must
be real and proximate.” Rittner v. Kinder, 290 F. App’x 796, 797 (6th Cir. Aug. 20, 2008). Past
allegations of danger, as well as allegations “that are conclusory, ridiculous, or clearly baseless
do not suffice to allege imminent harm.” Tucker v. Pentrich, 483 F. App’x 28, 30 (6th Cir. May
15, 2012).
Plaintiff has on at least three prior occasions filed a civil action in federal court that was
summarily dismissed for failure to state a claim.1 Furthermore, the instant action does not
contain allegations suggesting he is in imminent danger of serious physical injury due to
Defendants’ alleged failure in not delivering his certified mail letter. ECF No. 1 at PageID#: 5.
Therefore, Plaintiff may not proceed in forma pauperis in this case.
Accordingly, Plaintiff’s Motion to Proceed in forma pauperis (ECF No. 2) is denied, and
this action is dismissed without prejudice. If Plaintiff wishes to proceed with this action, he
must, within thirty (30) days from the date of this Order, pay the entire filing fee of $400.00. No
other documents will be accepted for filing unless Plaintiff pays the filing fee in full. If Plaintiff
does not pay the full filing fee within thirty (30) days, this case will be dismissed with prejudice.

1

See Moshir v. NEOCC, et al., Case No. 4:17CV1106 (N.D. Ohio Aug. 31. 2017)
(Pearson, J.); Moshir v. Valentine, Case No. 4:17CV1459 (N.D. Ohio Aug. 31, 2017)
(Pearson, J.); Moshir v. NEOCC, et al., Case No. 4:17CV1480 (N.D. Ohio Oct. 13, 2017)
(Pearson, J.).
2

(4:17CV1460)
The Court certifies, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3), that an appeal from this decision
could not be taken in good faith.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

November 28, 2017
Date

/s/ Benita Y. Pearson
Benita Y. Pearson
United States District Judge

3