Sivak v. Perea

Background

Lacey Sivak filed the above-captioned actions and represented himself. In each case, he requested permission to proceed without paying the filing fee. The court denied those requests under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g), a provision that generally bars a prisoner with three or more qualifying prior dismissals from proceeding without paying fees unless the prisoner alleges a specific imminent danger of serious physical injury.

The court found that Sivak had three or more prior dismissals and had not alleged the required imminent danger when he filed these actions. The court directed him to pay the full filing fee within 14 days or risk dismissal without prejudice.

Appeals and jurisdiction

Sivak did not pay the filing fees by the deadline. Instead, he appealed some of the orders. The court explained that an interlocutory appeal—an appeal before the case is finally resolved—does not take effect until the court of appeals permits the appeal. Because the Ninth Circuit had not granted permission, the district court retained authority over these actions.

Rulings

The court dismissed each above-captioned action without prejudice. The order states that, after paying the full filing fee, Sivak may move to reopen any case he wishes to pursue, and that a separate full filing fee is required for each case.

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 review any request to proceed without fees on appeal and decide whether to grant it.

Finally, the Clerk was directed to terminate all other pending motions in each case as moot and close all of the cases.