From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Grimes v. Alcantra

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Mar 1, 2013
No. C 13-0719 JSW (PR) (N.D. Cal. Mar. 1, 2013)

Opinion

No. C 13-0719 JSW (PR)

03-01-2013

JEROME L. GRIMES, Plaintiff, v. ALCANTRA, et al., Defendants.


ORDER OF DISMISSAL

Plaintiff, an inmate in the Napa State Hospital and frequent litigator in this Court, has recently filed this pro se civil rights case. On May 18, 2000, this Court informed Plaintiff that under the "three-strikes" provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g) he generally is ineligible to proceed in forma pauperis in federal court with civil actions filed while he is incarcerated. See Grimes v. Oakland Police Dept., C 00-1100 CW (Order Dismissing Complaint, 5/18/00). Since then, Plaintiff has continued to file hundreds of civil rights actions seeking in forma pauperis status. With respect to each action filed, the Court conducts a preliminary review to assess the nature of the allegations and to determine whether Plaintiff alleges facts which bring him within the "imminent danger of serious physical injury" exception to § 1915(g). In the past, Plaintiff has routinely been granted leave to amend to pay the full filing fee and to state cognizable claims for relief, but he has habitually failed to do so. For example, in 2003 alone Plaintiff's failure to comply resulted in the dismissal of approximately thirty-six actions under § 1915(g).

In accord with this ongoing practice, the Court has reviewed the allegations in the present action and finds that Plaintiff alleges no facts which bring him within the "imminent danger" clause. The complaint makes a series of nonsensical or inherently impossible allegations, including "organ smuggling," "cannibalism," mass child exploitation and abduction," and "right to breakfast venue while continuous hospitalization." As has been explained to Plaintiff countless times, such claims are barred. Therefore, it would be futile to grant Plaintiff leave to amend. And even if Plaintiff did amend, he would be required to pay the $350.00 filing fee, which he has never done.

Accordingly, this case is DISMISSED without prejudice under § 1915(g). The application to proceed in forma pauperis is DENIED. No fee is due. If Plaintiff is so inclined, he may bring his claims in a new action accompanied by the $350.00 filing fee. In any event, the Court will continue to review under § 1915(g) all future actions filed by Plaintiff while he is incarcerated in which he seeks in forma pauperis status.

The Clerk of the Court shall close the files and terminate all pending motions in the cases listed in the caption of this order.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

_________

JEFFREY S. WHITE

United States District Judge
JEROME L GRIMES, Plaintiff,

v. ALCANTARA et al, Defendant.

Case Number: CV13-00719 JSW


CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I, the undersigned, hereby certify that I am an employee in the Office of the Clerk, U.S. District Court, Northern District of California. That on March 1, 2013, I SERVED a true and correct copy(ies) of the attached, by placing said copy(ies) in a postage paid envelope addressed to the person(s) hereinafter listed, by depositing said envelope in the U.S. Mail, or by placing said copy(ies) into an inter-office delivery receptacle located in the Clerk's office. Jerome L. Grimes
Napa State Hospital
#206586-0/ Unit Q-1 & 2
2100 Napa Vallejo Highway
Napa, CA 94558

Richard W. Wieking, Clerk

By: Jennifer Ottolini, Deputy Clerk


Summaries of

Grimes v. Alcantra

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Mar 1, 2013
No. C 13-0719 JSW (PR) (N.D. Cal. Mar. 1, 2013)
Case details for

Grimes v. Alcantra

Case Details

Full title:JEROME L. GRIMES, Plaintiff, v. ALCANTRA, et al., Defendants.

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

Date published: Mar 1, 2013

Citations

No. C 13-0719 JSW (PR) (N.D. Cal. Mar. 1, 2013)