CREDICO v. BOKHARI et al

Filing 2

MEMORANDUM/OPINION THAT PLAINTIFF WILL BE ALLOWED TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS ON THE CLAIM THAT HE IS NOT RECEIVING ADEQUATE MEDICAL TREATMENT, ETC., ALONE AGAINST DEFENDANTS BOKHARI, BAKER AND MURPHY. PLAINTIFF'S OTHER CLAIMS WILL BE DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. SIGNED BY HONORABLE JEFFREY L. SCHMEHL ON 7/20/16. 7/21/16 ENTERED AND COPIES MAILED TO PRO SE'.(ky, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
CIVIL ACTION

JUSTIN CREDICO

v.

MEMORANDUM

SCHMEHL, J

FILED

NO. 16-3726

FDC PHILA

'JUL .21 2016
JULY~

, 2 08101AEL E.1(11~1~ ~Jet,
8"
.rl~
.
~v
aintiff, an inmate, has filed this civil action

against members of the staff at the Federal Detention Center in
Philadelphia, two unidentified persons at the Regional Office of
the Bureau of Prisons, the United States Attorney General and the
Senate Legal Counsel.

currently before the court is plaintiff's

motion to proceed in forma pauperis.
According to§ 1915{g}, a prisoner who on three or more
prior occasions while incarcerated has filed an action or appeal
in federal court that was dismissed as frivolous, malicious, or
for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted,
must be denied in forma pauperis status unless he was in imminent
danger of serious physical injury at the time that the complaint
was filed.
Cir. 2001}

Abdul-Akbar v. McKelvie, 239 F.3d 307, 310-11 (3d
(en bane).

"[A] strike under § 1915 {g) will accrue

only if the entire action or appeal is {l} dismissed explicitly
because it is 'frivolous,'

'malicious,' or 'fails to state a

claim' or {2) dismissed pursuant to a statutory provision or rule
that is limited solely to dismissals for such reasons, including
{but not necessarily limited to) 28 U.S.C. §§ 1915A{b) (1),
1915 (e) (2) (B) (ii,

1915 (e) (2) (B) (ii),

Federal Rules of Civil Procedure."

or Rule 12 (b) (6)

Byrd v. Shannon,

of the

715 F.3d

117, 126 (3d Cir. 2013) .

Plaintiff accumulated at least three

"strikes" for purposes of 28 U.S.C.
filed this action.
(3d Cir. 2013)
U.S.C.

§

§

1915 (g) at the time he

See Credico v. Milligan,

544 F. App'x 46, 48

(dismissing appeal as frivolous pursuant to 28

1915(e) (2) (B) (i}); Credico v. Unknown Official for U.S.

Drone Strikes, 537 F. App'x 22 (3d Cir. 2013)
CEO Idaho Nat'l Lab., 461 F. App'x 78

(same); Credico v.

(3d Cir. 2012)

(dismissing

appeal as frivolous); Credico v. Milligan, E.D. Pa. Civ. A. No.
13-4111 (E.D. Pa.)

{July 24, 2013 Memorandum and Order dismissing

the case as frivolous}; Credico v. Unknown Official for Drone
Strikes, E.D. Pa. Civ. A. No. 13-1311 (E.D. Pa.)

(April 15, 2013

Order dismissing the case as frivolous); Credico v. CEO Idaho
Nat'l Lab., E.D. Pa. Civ. A. No. 11-6025 (Oct. 4, 2011 Order
dismissing the case as frivolous}.
In light of plaintiff's three strikes, he may not proceed in
forma pauperis unless he was in imminent danger of serious
physical injury at the time he filed his complaint.

Plaintiff is

alleging that he is not receiving adequate medical treatment for
itching, burning, numbness and pain that he has on his legs where
he was bitten by a bat prior to his incarceration.

Therefore,

plaintiff will be allowed to proceed in forma pauperis on that
claim alone against defendants Bokhari, Baker and Murphy.
Plaintiff's other claims will be dismissed without prejudice.