(PC) Azevedo v. Smith

8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA ALEX LEONARD AZEVEDO, No. 2:24-cv-3104 DC CKD P 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. FINDINGS & RECOMMENDATIONS KEVIN SMITH, 15 Defendant.

17 Plaintiff is a California prisoner proceeding pro se with a civil action. This proceeding was referred to this court by Local Rule 302 pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1).

19 Plaintiff has requested leave to proceed in forma pauperis. Title 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g) reads as follows: 21 In no event shall a prisoner bring a civil action . . . [in forma pauperis] if the prisoner has, on 3 or more prior occasions, while 22 incarcerated or detained in any facility, brought an action or appeal in a court of the United States that was dismissed on the grounds 23 that it is frivolous, malicious, or fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, unless the prisoner is under imminent danger 24 of serious physical injury.

25 On November 29, 2018, it was determined in Azevedo v. Smith, 2:18-cv-2818 TLN AC P that plaintiff has “struck out” for purposes of 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). Judgment was entered February 26, 2019, and plaintiff did not appeal. This action was commenced approximately 5 1/2 years after judgment was final. ] The allegations in plaintiff's complaint concern review of documents plaintiff believes to || be confidential. There is no allegation by plaintiff that he is under imminent danger of serious || physical injury.

4 In light of the foregoing, the court will recommend that plaintiff's request for leave to || proceed in forma pauperis be denied.

6 IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that: 7 1. Plaintiffs request for leave to proceed in forma pauperis (ECF No. 2 ) be denied.

8 2. Plaintiff be granted fourteen days to pay the $405 filing fee for this action.

9 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)(1). 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 waives the right to appeal the District Court’s order. Martinez v. YIst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991).

16 || Dated: December 4, 2024 fi 20 } Kt | / , a he "7 CAROLYNK.DELANEY 18 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE azev3 104.3ks