Demos v. Washington State Department of Corrections et al

Filing 4

ORDER DECLINING TO ADOPT #2 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION. Plaintiff's objection is SUSTAINED. This matter to be returned to the Hon. J. Richard Creatura for further consideration of whether the imminent danger exception applies, and all procedural requirements have been met. Signed by U.S. District Judge David G Estudillo. **2 PAGE(S), PRINT ALL**(John Demos, Prisoner ID: 287455)(AMD)

Case 3:22-cv-05539-DGE-JRC Document 4 Filed 09/15/22 Page 1 of 2

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON
AT TACOMA

8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23

JOHN ROBERT DEMOS, JR,
Plaintiff,
v.

CASE NO. 3:22-cv-05539-DGE-JRC
ORDER DENYING THE REPORT
AND RECOMMENDATION

WASHINGTON STATE DEPARTMENT
OF CORRECTIONS et al.,
Defendants.

On August 3, 2022, Chief Magistrate Judge J. Richard Creatura prepared a Report and
Recommendation (“R&R”) denying Plaintiff’s proposed application to proceed in forma
pauperis (“IFP”) and dismissing the case. (Dkt. No. 2.) Plaintiff is a bar order litigant who has
surpassed his three IFP applications this year. (Id. at 2.) Judge Creatura concluded that Plaintiff
is barred from proceeding IFP because the bar orders in question enjoin Plaintiff without
exception once he has surpassed the annual limit. (Id.) Plaintiff objects on the sole ground that
the “imminent danger” exception under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g) supersedes the dictates of the bar
order limiting him to only three IFP actions per year. (Dkt. No. 3.) The Court finds that the bar

24
25
ORDER DENYING THE REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION - 1

Case 3:22-cv-05539-DGE-JRC Document 4 Filed 09/15/22 Page 2 of 2

1

orders limiting Plaintiff to three IFP applications per year do not apply to subsequent

2

applications if Plaintiff plausibly pleads imminent danger and meets all other procedural

3

requirements of the prior injunctions. See Demos v. Strange, No. C22-5464-TL-JRC (W.D.

4

Wash. Aug. 3, 2022) (finding that Plaintiff’s bar orders do not supersede the imminent danger

5

exception in 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g)). The Court will return the matter to the Honorable J. Richard

6

Creatura for further consideration consistent with this Order.

7

The Court therefore ORDERS:

8

1. Plaintiff’s objection is SUSTAINED;

9

2. This matter to be returned to the Hon. J. Richard Creatura for further consideration of

10

whether the imminent danger exception applies, and all procedural requirements have

11

been met; and

12

3. The Clerk shall send copies of this order to Plaintiff and the Hon. J. Richard Creatura.

13

Dated this 15th day of September 2022.

14
15
16
17
18

A
David G. Estudillo
United States District Judge

19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ORDER DENYING THE REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION - 2