Jacinto

(PC) Driver v. Jacinto

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaMay 22, 20252:24-cv-03800California932 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 BILLY DRIVER, JR., Case No. 2:24-cv-3800-DAD-JDP (P) Plaintiff, v. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS JACINTO, et al., Defendants. 16 Plaintiff has filed an amended complaint, ECF No. 11, and a request to proceed in forma pauperis, ECF No. 4. As I found in my previous order, plaintiff is a “three-striker” within the meaning of Title 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). He has filed at least three cases that were dismissed for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted: (1) Driver v. Martel, No. 08-cv-1910- GEB-EFB (E.D. Cal. Sept. 15, 2009) at ECF Nos. 28 & 32; (2) Driver v. Kelso, No. 2:11-cv- 2397-EFB-P (E.D. Cal. Aug. 9, 2012) at ECF Nos. 17 & 20; (3) Driver v. Epp, No. 2:12-cv-0589- EFB (E.D. Cal. Sept. 5, 2012) at ECF Nos. 7 & 8. When a prisoner-plaintiff is a three-striker and files an application to proceed in forma pauperis, a court will generally only grant such an application if the complaint demonstrates that the…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.