(PC) Williams-Mootry v. Benbrook

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

LONNIE MO’NIQUE WILLIAMS- No. 2:21-cv-0229 CKD P

MOOTRY,

Plaintiff,

ORDER AND v.

FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

JOSHUA DAVID BENBROOK, et al.,

Defendants.

Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed a civil rights action pursuant to 42 19 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff requests leave to proceed in forma pauperis. Title 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g) reads as follows:

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.

A review of court records reveals that plaintiff was found to have “struck out” in 1:03-cv- 6770 REC WMW and judgment in that action was final well before this action was commenced. Plaintiff does not allege plaintiff is under imminent danger of serious physical injury. /////

In light of the foregoing, the court will recommend that plaintiffs request for leave to proceed in forma pauperis be denied and plaintiff be granted fourteen days within which to pay the filing fee for this action.!

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court assign a district court judge to this case; and

IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that:

1. Plaintiff's motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis (ECF No. 4) be denied; and 2. Plaintiff be ordered to submit the $402 filing fee for this action within 14 days. These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(). Within fourteen days after being served with these findings and recommendations, plaintiff may file written objections with the court. The document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” Plaintiff is advised that failure to file objections within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order. Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991).

Dated: May 18, 2021 d ty / da ds AWG fe HO. LAG

M CAROLYNK.DELANEY

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE iy will0229.3k

| Inadocument received by the court on February 26, 2021, plaintiff suggests that $400 was sent to the court to partially satisfy the filing fee for this matter. Plaintiff is informed that the court has no record of receiving any such funds.