From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Pellum v. Restaurant

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Mar 24, 2015
Case No. 1:15-cv-410 LJO-BAM (E.D. Cal. Mar. 24, 2015)

Opinion

Case No. 1:15-cv-410 LJO-BAM

03-24-2015

JASON PELLUM, SR., Plaintiff, v. FLEMINGS RESTAURANT, Defendant.


ORDER DISMISSING ACTION, WITHOUT PREJUDICE, PURSUANT TO 28 U.S.C. § 1915(G) (Doc. 2)

Plaintiff, Jason Everett Pellum ("Plaintiff"), a prisoner proceeding pro se in this action filed a complaint, as well as a request to proceed in forma pauperis on February 25, 2015. (Docs. 1, and 2). 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).

This case was initially filed on February 25, 2014 in the Sacramento Division of this district and was transferred to this Court on March 16, 2015. (Docs. 1 and 3).

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. Accordingly, the Court HEREBY ORDERS as follows this action is DISMISSED, without prejudice to re-filing accompanied by the $400.00 filing fee. SO ORDERED
Dated: March 24, 2015

/s/ Lawrence J. O'Neill

United States District Judge


Summaries of

Pellum v. Restaurant

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Mar 24, 2015
Case No. 1:15-cv-410 LJO-BAM (E.D. Cal. Mar. 24, 2015)
Case details for

Pellum v. Restaurant

Case Details

Full title:JASON PELLUM, SR., Plaintiff, v. FLEMINGS RESTAURANT, Defendant.

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Date published: Mar 24, 2015

Citations

Case No. 1:15-cv-410 LJO-BAM (E.D. Cal. Mar. 24, 2015)