From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Pellum v. O'Neill

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Feb 12, 2015
Case No. 1:15-cv-00120 AWI DLB (PC) (E.D. Cal. Feb. 12, 2015)

Opinion

Case No. 1:15-cv-00120 AWI DLB (PC)

02-12-2015

JASON E. PELLUM, SR., Plaintiff, v. FEDERAL JUDGE LAWRENCE J. O'NEILL, et al., Defendants.


ORDER DISMISSING ACTION, WITHOUT PREJUDICE, PURSUANT TO 28 U.S.C. § 1915(G) (Doc. 1)

Plaintiff Jason E. Pellum, Sr., a state prisoner proceeding pro se, filed this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 on January 9, 2015. Plaintiff is subject to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g), which provides that "[i]n 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 physical injury."

Plaintiff has at least three dismissals which qualify as final strikes under section 1915(g). Silva v. Di Vittorio, 658 F.3d 1090, 1098-99 (9th Cir. 2011). The Court takes judicial notice of the following United States District Court cases: Pellum v. Fresno Police Dept., 1:10-cv-1258-OWW-SKO (E.D.Cal.) (dismissed for failure to state a claim on Mar. 7, 2011); Pellum v. The White House, 2:13-cv-0651-AC (E.D.Cal.) (dismissed as frivolous on April 26, 2013); Pellum v. Skiles, 1:14-cv-1082-MJS (E.D.Cal.) (dismissed for failure to state a claim on July 22, 2014).

The Court has reviewed Plaintiff's complaint and his allegations do not satisfy the imminent danger exception to section 1915(g). Andrews v. Cervantes, 493 F.3d 1047, 1055-56 (9th Cir. 2007). If Plaintiff wishes to pursue this action, he must first pay the $400.00 filing fee.

Plaintiff is currently incarcerated at Fresno County Jail, and his allegations concern judicial decisions in a state court case. His complaint presents no allegations that he is under imminent danger of serious physical injury.
--------

Accordingly, the Court HEREBY ORDERS that this action is DISMISSED, without prejudice to re-filing accompanied by the $400.00 filing fee. IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: February 12, 2015

/s/_________

SENIOR DISTRICT JUDGE


Summaries of

Pellum v. O'Neill

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Feb 12, 2015
Case No. 1:15-cv-00120 AWI DLB (PC) (E.D. Cal. Feb. 12, 2015)
Case details for

Pellum v. O'Neill

Case Details

Full title:JASON E. PELLUM, SR., Plaintiff, v. FEDERAL JUDGE LAWRENCE J. O'NEILL, et…

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Date published: Feb 12, 2015

Citations

Case No. 1:15-cv-00120 AWI DLB (PC) (E.D. Cal. Feb. 12, 2015)