From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Thomas v. Ahmed

United States District Court, E.D. California
Apr 25, 2007
No. CIV S-06-2925 MCE KJM P (E.D. Cal. Apr. 25, 2007)

Opinion

No. CIV S-06-2925 MCE KJM P.

April 25, 2007


ORDER


Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed a civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Review of court records reveals that on at least three occasions prior to the filing of this action lawsuits filed by plaintiff in this district were dismissed on the grounds that they were frivolous or malicious or failed to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. See Thomas v. Galaza, CIV F 00-5345 AWI LJO P (dismissed for failure to state a claim and as frivolous on June 26, 2000); Thomas v. Kim, CIV F 99-6553 AWI HGB P (dismissed for failure to state a claim on August 29, 2000); and Thomas v. Galaza, CIV F 00 5348 OWW LJO P (dismissed for failure to state a claim on November 14, 2000). Plaintiff was incarcerated when he brought each of these actions, and he did not take an appeal from the final judgment in any of them.

A court may take judicial notice of court records. See MGIC Indem. Co. v. Weisman, 803 F.2d 500, 505 (9th Cir. 1986); United States v. Wilson, 631 F.2d 118, 119 (9th Cir. 1980).

A prisoner may not bring a civil action or appeal a civil judgment under the in forma pauperis statute

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.
28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). In the present case, plaintiff has not alleged facts that suggest he is under imminent danger of serious physical injury. Thus, plaintiff must pay the filing fee in order to proceed with this case.

In accordance with the above, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Plaintiff shall submit, within twenty days from the date of this order, the $350.00 filing fee for this action; and

2. Plaintiff's failure to comply with this order will result in a recommendation that this action be dismissed.


Summaries of

Thomas v. Ahmed

United States District Court, E.D. California
Apr 25, 2007
No. CIV S-06-2925 MCE KJM P (E.D. Cal. Apr. 25, 2007)
Case details for

Thomas v. Ahmed

Case Details

Full title:KEITH THOMAS, Plaintiff, v. G. AHMED, et al., Defendants

Court:United States District Court, E.D. California

Date published: Apr 25, 2007

Citations

No. CIV S-06-2925 MCE KJM P (E.D. Cal. Apr. 25, 2007)