David Wilson v. K. Lassiter

Good Law
667 F. App'x 969
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitAugust 4, 201615-16129California225 words

Opinion

Opinion

MEMORANDUM

California state prisoner David Wayne Wilson appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action for failure to pay the filing fee, after the district court denied him leave to proceed in forma pauperis. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review de novo the district court’s interpretation and application of 28 U.S.C. § 1915 (g), Andrews v. Cervantes, 493 F.3d 1047, 1052 (9th Cir. 2007), and for an abuse of discretion its denial of leave to proceed in forma pauperis, O’Loughlin v. Doe, 920 F.2d 614, 616 (9th Cir. 1990). We affirm.

The district court did not abuse its discretion in denying Wilson’s request to proceed in forma pauperis because at least three of Wilson’s prior 42 U.S.C. § 1983 actions were dismissed for failure to state a claim, and Wilson did not plausibly allege that he was “under imminent danger of serious physical injury” at the time that he lodged the complaint. 28 U.S.C. § 1915 (g); see also Andrews, 493 F.3d at 1055 (an exception'to the three-strikes rule exists only where “the complaint makes a plausible allegation that the prisoner faced ‘imminent danger of serious physical injury1 at the time of…

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.