IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA

GLEN FOLSOM, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) Case No. CIV-22-201-D ) POTTAWATOMIE COUNTY COURTS, ) et al., ) ) Defendants. )

O R D E R

By Order of April 29, 2022 [Doc. No. 14], the Court ordered Plaintiff to pay the full filing fee for this action within 21 days, and gave notice that a failure to make the required payment or show cause for nonpayment would result in a dismissal of the action without prejudice to refiling. Plaintiff has not complied with the Order for payment but has filed a document entitled “Response to Order” [Doc. No. 16].1 The Court liberally construes this pro se filing as a show-cause response.2 Upon consideration, it appears that Plaintiff seeks to challenge the constitutionality and application of the three-strikes provision of

(g). The Court finds no basis, however, to excuse Plaintiff from the operation of that provision. See, e.g., White

1 Shortly after the April 29 Order, Plaintiff also sent other papers to the Clerk for filing that have no apparent connection to the fee payment issue. See Notice [Doc. No. 15].

2 Because Plaintiff appears pro se, the Court must liberally construe his pleadings and arguments, but cannot act as his advocate. See Yang v. Archuleta,

, 927 n.1 (10th Cir. 2008); Hall v. Bellmon,

(10th Cir. 1991). v. Colorado,

, 1235 (10th Cir. 1998) 1915(g) does not violate the guarantees of equal protection and due process”). Also, Plaintiff does not allege any facts that would satisfy the exception for a prisoner who is “under imminent danger of serious physical injury.” See

(g). Plaintiffs filing provides no other basis to delay a dismissal for nonpayment. IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that this action is DISMISSED without prejudice to a future filing. A separate judgment of dismissal shall be entered. IT IS SO ORDERED this 24" day of May, 2022.

Aid, QO TIMOTHY D. DeGIUSTI Chief United States District Judge