IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA Richmond Division

VINCENT ELLIOT WILSON,

Plaintiff,

v. Civil Action No. 3:23CV572 (RCY)

U.S. DISTRICT COURT, et. al.,

Defendants.

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Plaintiff, a Virginia inmate, submitted this action. Plaintiff has requested leave to proceed in forma pauperis.1 The pertinent statute provides: 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.

(g). Plaintiff has at least three other actions or appeals that have been dismissed as frivolous or for failure to state a claim. See Wilson v. Arthur, No. 3:23cv82 (DJN),

, at *6 (E.D. Va. Mar. 14, 2023); Wilson v. Burgess, No. 3:22cv662 (DJN),

, at *5 (E.D. Va. Mar. 14, 2023); Wilson v. Arthur, No. 3:22cv602 (DJN),

, at *6 (E.D. Va. Mar. 14, 2023), aff’d

(4th Cir. July 28, 2023); Wilson v. U.S.P.S, No. 3:22cv689 (DJN),

, *2 (E.D. Va. Feb. 14, 2023); Wilson v. Lindsey, No. 3:23cv83 (DJN),

, at *2 (E.D. Va. Feb. 14, 2023), aff’d

The Court employs the pagination assigned by the CM/ECF docketing system. 4839386 (4th Cir. July 28, 2023). Plaintiff's current complaint does not suggest that he is in imminent danger of serious physical harm.” Accordingly, his request to proceed in forma pauperis will be DENIED. The action will be DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. Plaintiff remains free to submit a new complaint with the full $402 filing fee. The Court will process such a complaint as a new civil action. An appropriate Final Order will accompany this Memorandum Opinion.

sf VY Roderick C. Young Date: September 13, 2023 United States District Ju Richmond, Virginia

? Plaintiff names the U.S. District Court “Courthouse,” Judge David J. Novak, Judge Mark. R. Colombell, the United States of America, and perhaps the Commonwealth of Virginia (ECF No. 1, at 1, 3), and faults them for dismissing his many cases, charging excessive fees, and depriving him of free copies. (/d. at 6-7, 9.) The remainder of the action is a general airing of grievances about his conditions of confinement, including that he had cancer for two years and the detention center did not provide him treatment for cancer upon his arrival, and his contention that the Clerk’s Office allegedly has hung up on him when he tries to “tell them that the Arlington County Jail is trying to kill him in his food and ask[s] to speak with police or Marshals.” (dd. at 7-8.) Even if the named Defendants were somehow personally involved in these allegations, which they are not, Plaintiff fails to show that he is in imminent danger of serious harm.