NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS JAN 22 2019

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

RODNEY JEROME WOMACK, No. 18-15075

Plaintiff-Appellant, D.C. No. 2:17-cv-00829-JAM-AC

v.

MEMORANDUM*

D. SWINGLE, M.D./Chief Medical Officer,

High Desert State Prison; et al.,

Defendants-Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California John A. Mendez, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted January 15, 2019**

Before: TROTT, TALLMAN, and CALLAHAN, Circuit Judges.

California state prisoner Rodney Jerome Womack appeals pro se from the

district court’s order denying him leave to proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP”) in his

42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging deliberate indifference to his serious medical

needs. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo.

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3. ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). Washington v. L.A. Cty. Sheriff’s Dep’t, 833 F.3d 1048, 1054 (9th Cir. 2016). We

affirm.

The district court properly denied Womack’s motion to proceed IFP because

at the time Womack filed the complaint, he had filed three actions that qualified as

strikes, and he did not plausibly allege that he was “under imminent danger of

serious physical injury” at the time he lodged the complaint. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g);

Andrews v. Cervantes, 493 F.3d 1047, 1053, 1055-56 (9th Cir. 2007) (discussing

the imminent danger exception to § 1915(g)).

AFFIRMED.

2 18-15075