MEMORANDUM **

Melinda Gabrielia Valenzuela, an Arizona state prisoner, appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing her 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging Eighth Amendment violations in connection with her medical care. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo the district court’s interpretation and application of 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). Andrews v. Cervantes, 493 F.3d 1047, 1052 (9th Cir. 2007). We affirm.

Dismissal of Valenzuela’s action was proper because at least three of Valenzue *491 la’s prior § 1983 actions were dismissed as frivolous or for failure to state a claim, and Valenzuela did not plausibly allege that she was “under imminent danger of serious physical injury” at the time she lodged the complaint. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g); Andrews, 493 F.3d at 1055 (an exception to the three-strikes rules exists only where “the complaint makes a plausible allegation that the prisoner faced ‘imminent danger of serious physical injury5 at the time of filing”). .

Valenzuela’s request for-an order stating that documents must be mailed to the court, filed on April 24, 2015, is denied.

AFFIRMED.