Opinion
1:23-cv-0290 JLT BAM (PC)
03-27-2023
ISRAEL MALDONADO-RAMIREZ, Plaintiff, v. STANLEY A. BOONE, et al., Defendants.
ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS, DENYING PLAINTIFF'S APPLICATION TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS, AND DIRECTING PAYMENT OF THE FILING FEE
(DOCS. 7, 9)
Israel Maldonado-Ramirez is a county jail inmate proceeding pro se in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff filed a motion to proceed in forma pauperis in this action, in which he appears to raise claims related to his disagreement with the rulings in his other court actions, issues receiving legal mail or property, removal of gold from his property, access to courts, his representation in a pending criminal matter, retaliation, and his requests for release from custody. (See Docs. 1, 2.)
The assigned magistrate judge found Plaintiff had at least three cases dismissed, which qualified as a “strike” under Ninth Circuit caselaw prior to filing this action. (Doc. 7 at 1-2.) Therefore, the magistrate judge found Plaintiff is subject to the three strikes bar under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). (Id.) In addition, the magistrate judge found the complaint did not contain any plausible allegations that would satisfy the “imminent danger of serious physical injury” exception to Section 1915(g), even when liberally construed. (Id. at 2.) Therefore, the magistrate judge recommended Plaintiff's motion to proceed IFP be denied, and Plaintiff be directed to pay the filing fee if he wished to proceed with the action. (Id.)
The Plaintiff filed a declaration that the Court construes to be his objections to the Findings and Recommendations. (Doc. 9.) In the declaration, which is difficult to understand, Plaintiff appears to assert this is an emergency suit that must go through. Plaintiff also references “Penal Code 402 (A)(C).” (Id. at 1-2.) Plaintiff's assertions are unpersuasive. Plaintiff does not dispute the finding that he had more than three actions dismissed as frivolous, malicious, or for failure to state a claim. In addition, Plaintiff does not refute the finding that he fails to demonstrate any imminent danger of serious physical injury, such that the exception of 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g) may be invoked.
Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), the Court conducted a de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the Court concludes the Findings and Recommendations are supported by the record and by proper analysis. Accordingly, the Court ORDERS:
1. The Findings and Recommendations issued on February 28, 2023 (Doc. 7) are ADOPTED in full.
2. Plaintiff's motion to proceed in forma pauperis (Doc. 2) is DENIED.
3. Within 21 days from the date of service of this order, Plaintiff SHALL pay in full the $402.00 filing fee if he wishes to proceed with his action.
4. Plaintiff is advised that failure to pay the required filing fee as ordered will result in the dismissal of this action without prejudice.
IT IS SO ORDERED.