Williams v. Bannon

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT TACOMA JAMES ANTHONY WILLIAMS, CASE NO. 3:25-cv-05706-LK Plaintiff, ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND 12 v. RECOMMENDATION 13 BANNON et al., 14 Defendants.

16 This matter comes before the Court on United States Magistrate Judge Grady J. Leupold’s Report and Recommendation (“R&R”). Dkt. No. 4. Judge Leupold recommends that this Court deny Mr. Williams’ application to proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP”) because Mr. Williams has incurred at least three “strikes” under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g)1 and has failed to demonstrate that he was under imminent danger of serious physical injury at the time he filed his proposed complaint.

1 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g) of the Prison Litigation Reform Act states as follows: In no event shall a prisoner bring a civil action under this section 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 24 physical injury.

1 Id. at 1, 4; see also id. at 3 (citing Williams v. Portine, No. 2:11‐cv‐01214‐JCC, Dkt. Nos. 8, 20, 21 (W.D. Wash.); Williams v. Neely, No. 2:15‐cv‐00489‐BJR, Dkt. Nos. 4, 17, 18 (W.D. Wash.); Williams v. Collins, No. 2:15‐cv‐00735‐MJP, Dkt. Nos. 7, 11, 12 (W.D. Wash.)). Plaintiff James Anthony Williams, who is proceeding pro se, has not filed any objections to the R&R. 5 The Court generally reviews findings and recommendations “if objection is made, but not otherwise.” United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th Cir. 2003) (en banc). Having reviewed the R&R, the record, and the applicable law, the Court adopts Judge Leupold’s recommendation in full for the reasons stated therein. Dkt. No. 4 at 2 (explaining that “prisoners who have repeatedly brought unsuccessful suits may entirely be barred from IFP status under the three-strikes rule” (quoting Andrews v. Cervantes, 493 F.3d 1047, 1051–52 (9th Cir. 2007))).

11 For the reasons stated above, the Court DENIES Mr. Williams’ Motion for Leave to Proceed In Forma Pauperis, Dkt. No. 1, and ORDERS Mr. Williams to pay the $405.00 filing fee within 30 days of this Order. If Mr. Williams fails to do so, the Court will dismiss this case without prejudice.

15 Dated this 8th day of September, 2025.

16 A 17 Lauren King United States District Judge