Schuett v. Wilson et al

Filing 4

MEMORANDUM OPINION. SEE OPINION FOR COMPLETE DETAILS. Signed by District Judge Robert E. Payne on 11/26/2017. Copy of Memorandum Opinion mailed to Plaintiff as directed.(ccol, ) (Main Document 4 replaced on 11/28/2017) (ccol, ).

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA
Richmond Division
CLIFFORD J. SCHUETT,
CLERK. U.S. DiST M1CT COUR1
RlCHMOrm. VA
.

Plaintiff,

v.

Civil Action No. 3:17CV700

ERIC WILSON, et al.,
Defendants.

MEMORANDUM OPINION
Clifford J. Schuett, a federal inmate, submitted this civil
action and applied to proceed in forma pauperis.

The pertinent

statute provides:
In no event shall a prisoner bring a civil action
[in forma pauperis] 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 under imminent danger of serious physical
injury.
28

U.S.C.

§

191S(g).

Schuett has at

least

three actions

or

appeals that have been dismissed as frivolous or for failure to
state a

claim.

No. 14-00374,

See Schuett v.

2014 WL 5781409,

Governor,
at *1-2

(D.

State of Haw.,
Haw.

Nov.

6,

Civ.
2014)

(denying in forma pauperis status and listing five cases that
are strikes under§ 1915(g)) ; 1 see also Schuett v. Unknown Party,

1

Hawaii

The United States District Court for the District of
cited the following five cases that count as strikes:

No. CV-14-01663-JJT (JZB)

(D. Ariz. Oct. 22, 2014) . 2

Schuett's

current complaint does not demonstrate that he is in imminent
danger of serious physical harm.
Accordingly,
2017,

the

Court

by

Memorandum

denied Schuett' s

Order

entered

request

on

October

3 O,

to proceed in forma

pauperis is denied and directed him to submit the full $400. 00
filing fee within eleven (11) days of the date of entry hereof.
More
failed

than eleven

to pay the

full

(11)

days

$400.

have

elapsed and Schuett has

oo filing fee.

Accordingly,

the

action will be dismissed without prejudice.
The Clerk is directed to send a

copy of

this Memorandum

Opinion to Schuett.

It is so ORDERED.

/s/

fit. f

Robert E. Payne
Senior United States District Judge

Date: W~ ~'-1vt7t7
Richmond, Virginia

Schuett v. Attorney Gen. of Cal., No. 14-6794 (C.D. Cal. Sept.
16, 2014); Schuett v. United States Marshal Serv., No. 2:13-cv010163 JCM {D. Nev. July 29, 2013); Schuett v. Sheriff, Cnty.
Jail of Rochester, New York, Civ. No. 6:95-cv-6216 (W.D.N.Y. May
30, 1995); Schuett v. Sheriff, Cnty. Jail of Rochester, New
York, Civ. No. 6:95-cv-6157 {W.D.N.Y. May 30, 1995}; Schuett v.
BM Fauber, Civ. No. 88-73527 HWG (E.D. Mich. Sept. 13, 1988).
2

The United States District Court for the District of
Arizona cited four of the above-listed cases and one additional
case:
Schuett v.
CEO-CCA-Correctional Corp.
of America,
No. 2:14-cv-1431-JAD-PAL (D. Nev. Oct. 3, 2014).
2