Sivak v. Thompson

Background

Lacey Sivak, an Idaho state prisoner and frequent litigant, filed the listed actions while representing himself. The court had denied his requests to proceed without paying filing fees under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g), which limits that status for a prisoner who has had three or more qualifying prior dismissals unless he alleges a specific imminent danger of serious physical injury. The court found that Sivak had not met that exception.

Appeals and filing-fee deadline

The court directed Sivak to pay the full filing fee in each case within fourteen days or face dismissal without prejudice. Sivak did not pay the fees and instead appealed some of the orders. The court explained that a notice of appeal from an interlocutory order does not become effective until the court of appeals permits the appeal. Because the Ninth Circuit had not granted permission for these appeals, the district court retained jurisdiction.

Rulings

The court dismissed each listed action without prejudice because Sivak’s deadline to pay the filing fee had passed. The court stated that Sivak may file a motion to reopen a case after paying that case’s full filing fee, and that a separate full filing fee is required for each case he seeks to reopen and pursue.

The court also denied any pending motion for permission to proceed without paying the filing fee on appeal under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g), for the same reasons it denied that status in the district court. The court noted that the Ninth Circuit would independently decide whether Sivak may proceed without paying fees on appeal. Finally, the clerk was directed to terminate all other pending motions as moot and close the listed cases.

Effect of the order

The order ended the listed district-court cases without prejudice. It did not decide the underlying claims described in those cases. The court’s ruling concerned filing-fee status, the effect of Sivak’s attempted interlocutory appeals, and case closure.