Opinion
CIVIL ACTION NO. 16-3726
07-20-2016
JUSTIN CREDICO v. FDC PHILA MLP BOKHARI, et al.
MEMORANDUM SCHMEHL, J.
Plaintiff, an inmate, has filed this civil action against members of the staff at the Federal Detention Center in Philadelphia, two unidentified persons at the Regional Office of the Bureau of Prisons, the United States Attorney General and the Senate Legal Counsel. Currently before the Court is plaintiff's motion to proceed in forma pauperis.
According to § 1915(g), a prisoner who on three or more prior occasions while incarcerated has filed an action or appeal in federal courb that was dismissed as frivolous, malicious, or for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granbed, must be denied in forma pauperis status unless he was in imminent danger of serious physical injury at the time that the complaint was filed. Abdul-Akbar v. McKelvie, 239 F.3d 307, 310-11 (3d Cir. 2001) (en banc). "[A] strike under § 1915(g) will accrue only if the enbire action or appeal is (1) dismissed explicitly because it is 'frivolous,' 'malicious,' or 'fails to state a claim' or (2) dismissed pursuant to a statutory provision or rule that is limited solely to dismissals for such reasons, including (bub not necessarily limited to) 28 U.S.C. §§ 1915A(b)(1), 1915(e)(2)(B)(i), 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii), or Rule 12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure." Byrd v. Shannon, 715 F.3d 117, 126 (3d Cir. 2013). Plaintiff accumulated at least three "strikes" for purposes of 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g) at the time he filed this action. See Credico v. Milligan, 544 F. App'x 46, 48 (3d Cir. 2013) (dismissing appeal as frivolous pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i)); Credico v. Unknown Official for U.S. Drone Strikes, 537 F. App'x 22 (3d Cir. 2013) (same); Credico v. CEO Idaho Nat'l Lab., 461 F. App'x 78 (3d Cir. 2012) (dismissing appeal as frivolous); Credico v. Milligan, E.D. Pa. Civ. A. No. 13-4111 (E.D. Pa.) (July 24, 2013 Memorandum and Order dismissing the case as frivolous); Credico v. Unknown Official for Drone Strikes, E.D. Pa. Civ. A. No. 13-1311 (E.D. Pa.) (April 15, 2013 Order dismissing the case as frivolous); Credico v. CEO Idaho Nat'l Lab., E.D. Pa. Civ. A. No. 11-6025 (Oct. 4, 2011 Order dismissing the case as frivolous).
In light of plaintiff's three strikes, he may not proceed in forma pauperis unless he was in imminent danger of serious physical injury at the time he filed his complaint. Plaintiff is alleging that he is not receiving adequate medical treatment for itching, burning, numbness and pain that he has on his legs where he was bitten by a bat prior to his incarceration. Therefore, plaintiff will be allowed to proceed in forma pauperis on that claim alone against defendants Bokhari, Baker and Murphy. Plaintiff's other claims will be dismissed without prejudice.