Sivak v. Perea

Background

Lacey Sivak, an Idaho state prisoner representing himself, filed the many cases listed in the caption. In each case, the court denied his request to proceed without paying the filing fee, commonly called proceeding in forma pauperis or IFP. The court relied on the prisoner-litigation statute, 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g), which generally bars a prisoner with three or more qualifying prior dismissals from proceeding without paying the fee unless the prisoner alleges an imminent danger of serious physical injury. The court found that Sivak had three or more prior dismissals, had not alleged a specific imminent danger when he filed the actions, and did not meet the standard for proceeding without paying the fees.

The court ordered Sivak to pay the full filing fee in each case within 14 days or risk dismissal without prejudice. Sivak did not pay the fees and instead appealed some of the orders. The court explained that an interlocutory appeal generally transfers authority over the appealed issues to the Court of Appeals, but that such an appeal is not considered filed until the Court of Appeals permits it. Because the Ninth Circuit had not granted Sivak permission to bring the interlocutory appeals, the district court retained authority over these cases.

Ruling

The court held that the deadline to pay the filing fees had passed and dismissed each listed action without prejudice. The dismissal did not bar Sivak from seeking to reopen a case, but the court stated that he would have to pay the full filing fee for each case he wanted to reopen and pursue. The court also denied any pending request to proceed without paying the filing fee on appeal under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g) for the same reasons. It directed the Clerk to terminate all other pending motions as moot and close the cases. Judge Araceli Martinez-Olguin entered the order.