Gerry Dewayne Williams v. Sergeant McNeal et al
| Gerry Dewayne Williams |
| Sergeant McNeal, Camacho, A. Garcia, Florez, I. Onaghise, J. Bocock and K. Hall |
| 2:2023cv07292 |
| August 30, 2023 |
| US District Court for the Central District of California |
| A Joel Richlin |
| Mark C Scarsi |
| Prisoner: Civil Rights |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1983 Civil Rights |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on October 10, 2023. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 6 MINUTES (IN CHAMBERS) by Judge Mark C. ScarsiORDER RE: MOTION #5 . On September 11, 2023, the Court denied Plaintiff Gerry Williams leave to proceed without prepayment of filing fees on the basis that Plaintiff filed three or more prior actions or appeals dismissed on the grounds that they were frivolous, malicious, or failed to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. (Order, ECF No. 4.) Plaintiff now seeks an order acknowledging that he is not a three-strikes litigant within the meaning of 28 U.S.C. 1915(g). (Mot., ECF No. 5.) The Court treats the motion as one seeking reconsideration of the September 11 Order.Plaintiff argues that the dismissal of his 2014 case in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California should not count as a strike. (Mot. 25.) Plaintiff presents no material difference in fact or law, emergence of new material facts or change in law, or manifest showing of a failure to consider material facts to make his challenge to the Courts order appropriate under the reconsideration rule. C.D. Cal. R. 7-18. The Court denies the motion on this basis. The Court further denies the motion on the merits. Plaintiff submits that a dismissal on res judicata grounds does not amount to a dismissal for failure to state a claim, frivolousness, or maliciousness. (Mot. 4.) As explained in the Order, the dismissal of a duplicative complaint on res judicata grounds can amount to a dismissal for frivolity.The appeal has no bearing on the Courts analysis. Finally, Plaintiff argues that the Eastern District of California court erred in finding the 2014 case precluded. (See Mot. 5.) The Court declines to evaluate the merits of that courts decision in making its 1915(g) determination. The Courts 1915(g) determination remains in place. On its own motion, the Court extends Plaintiffs deadline to pay the filing fee in full. Plaintiff shall remit payment within 30 days of this Order. Failure to do so will result in dismissal without prejudice without further warning. Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b). (lc) |
| Filing 5 MOTION for Court to Acknowledge that Plaintiff Do Not have Three Strikes Pursuant to the Three Strike Law of the Prison Litigation Reform Act filed by Plaintiff Gerry Dewayne Williams. (es) (COURT TREATED MOTION AS FOR "RECONSIDERATION OF 9/11/23 ORDER")Modified on 10/10/2023 (lc). Modified on 10/10/2023 (lc). |
Filing 4
ORDER ON REQUEST TO PROCEED WITHOUT PREPAYMENT OF FILING FEES (PRISONER NON-HABEAS CASE) by Judge Mark C. Scarsi: DENYING #2 REQUEST for Leave to Proceed without Prepayment of Filing Fee. Plaintiff has three prior "strikes" but has not plausibly alleged that Plaintiff is in imminent danger of serious physical injury fairly traceable to unlawful conduct alleged in the complaint and redressable by the Court. Within 30 days of the date of this Order, Plaintiff must do the following: Plaintiff must pay the filing fee in full. If Plaintiff does not comply with these instructions within 30 days, this case will be DISMISSED without prejudice. (lc)
|
| Filing 3 NOTICE OF ASSIGNMENT to District Judge Mark C. Scarsi and referred to Magistrate Judge A. Joel Richlin. (jtil) |
| Filing 2 REQUEST to Proceed Without Prepayment of Filing Fees with Declaration in Support filed by Plaintiff Gerry Dewayne Williams. (jtil) |
| Filing 1 CIVIL RIGHTS COMPLAINT filed by Plaintiff Gerry Dewayne Williams filed against Defendants J. Bocock, Camacho, Florez, A. Garcia, K. Hall, McNeal, I. Onaghise, pursuant to 42 USC 1983. Case assigned to Judge Mark C. Scarsi and referred to Magistrate Judge A. Joel Richlin. (jtil) |
Access additional case information on PACER
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the California Central District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
