Opinion
No. CV 07-1853-PHX-MHM (DKD).
November 29, 2007
ORDER
Pending before this Court are Petitioner's "Motion For `T.R.O.' In Pursuant To Rule (65)(b), Fed.R.Civ.P." (Doc. #9) and "Motion For Recalculation" (Doc. #10). The Court will deny both Motions.
I. Background
On September 26, 2007, Plaintiff Jerrod Len Booth, who is confined in the Maricopa County Fourth Avenue Jail, filed a pro se civil rights Complaint pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Doc. #1) and an Application to Proceed In Forma Pauperis (Doc. #3). By Order filed October 10, 2007 (Doc. #4), the Court denied the Application to Proceed In Forma Pauperis and dismissed the Complaint and this action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g) without prejudice to Plaintiff filing a complaint in a new case accompanied by the full $350.00 filing fee. Judgment was entered on October 10, 2007 (Doc. #5).
On October 24, 2007, Petitioner filed a "Motion of Inquiry" (Doc. #7), in which he "plead[ed] with this Court for the reason(s) why" his Application to Proceed In Forma Pauperis (Doc. #3) was denied. By Order filed November 6, 2007 (Doc. #8), Plaintiff's Motion was granted to the extent that the Court reiterated that Plaintiff's Application to Proceed In Forma Pauperis (Doc. #3) was denied because he had more than three strikes under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g) and he was not in imminent danger of serious physical injury. For further details, Plaintiff was advised to refer to the Court's October 10, 2007 Order (Doc. #4).
II. Motion for T.R.O.
On November 14, 2007, Plaintiff filed a "Motion For `T.R.O.' In Pursuant To Rule (65)(b), Fed.R.Civ.P." (Doc. #9), in which he seeks a temporary restraining order for access to legal research material. Because this case is closed, with judgment having been entered on October 10, 2007 (Doc. #5), Plaintiff's Motion will be denied as moot.
III. Motion for Recalculation
On November 15, 2007, Plaintiff filed a "Motion For Recalculation" (Doc. #10), in which he "begs" this Court for a recount of his strikes under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g) and written documentation of his strikes if he has three or more. Plaintiff's Motion will be denied.
The Court's Order filed October 10, 2007 (Doc. #4) is self-explanatory. It lists four strikes against Plaintiff out of the 34 other lawsuits which he had filed in this Court while he was a prisoner. In case Plaintiff no longer has his copy of the Court's Order, the four prior actions dismissed for failure to state a claim that count as strikes were: (1) Booth v. Stewart, CV-02-2332-PHX-MHM (DKD) (D. Ariz. Order of dismissal filed February 13, 2003); (2) Booth v. Schriro, CV-04-2347-PHX-MHM (DKD) (D. Ariz. Order of dismissal filed August 31, 2005); (3)Booth v. Schriro, CV-04-2807-PHX-MHM (DKD) (D. Ariz. Order of dismissal filed March 15, 2006); and (4) Booth v. Schriro, CV-05-105-PHX-MHM (DKD) (D. Ariz. Judgment of dismissal filed April 27, 2006). IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiff's "Motion For `T.R.O.' In Pursuant To Rule (65)(b), Fed.R.Civ.P." (Doc. #9) and "Motion For Recalculation" (Doc. #10) are both denied.