Phillips

(PC) Harris v. Phillips

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaJuly 17, 20231:23-cv-01051California906 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

DISCUSSION

20 The Prison Litigation Reform Act of 1995 (PLRA) was enacted “to curb frivolous 21 prisoner complaints and appeals.” Silva v. Di Vittorio, 658 F.3d 1090, 1099-1100 (9th Cir. 22 2011). Pursuant to the PLRA, the in forma pauperis statue was amended to include section 23 1915(g), a non-merits related screening device which precludes prisoners with three or more 24 “strikes” from proceeding in forma pauperis unless they are under imminent danger of serious 25 physical injury. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g); Andrews v. Cervantes, 493 F.3d 1047, 1050 (9th Cir. 26 2007). The statute provides that “[i]n no event shall a prisoner bring a civil action … under this 27 section if the prisoner has, on 3 or more prior occasions, while incarcerated or detained in any 28 facility, brought an action or appeal in a court of the United States that was dismissed on the grounds that it is frivolous, malicious, or fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, unless the prisoner is under imminent danger of serious physical injury.” 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). A review of the actions filed by Plaintiff reveals that he is subject to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g) and is precluded…

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.