Sivak v. Olguin

Background

Lacey Sivak filed the numerous cases listed in the order. They included petitions for a writ of mandamus, meaning requests for a court order compelling specified conduct. The petitions concerned requested relief related to Sivak's petitions seeking to compel conduct by Zahida Perea, identified as the paralegal at the prison's law library, the Idaho State Correctional Institution Resource Center. Sivak also filed requests to proceed in forma pauperis, meaning without prepaying filing fees, in many of the cases.

The court stated that, since May 2024, it had disqualified Sivak from proceeding without prepaying fees under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g) and had dismissed him as a "three-striker" in more than 400 cases in the Northern District of California. Section 1915(g) prevents a prisoner with at least three qualifying dismissals from proceeding without prepaying fees unless the prisoner shows that he was in imminent danger of serious physical injury when he filed the case. The court found that the allegations in these cases did not show imminent danger at the time of filing.

Reasons for the ruling

The court therefore denied any pending requests to proceed without prepaying filing fees. It also stated that, even if a fee-waiver request were granted, the lawsuits would be barred under Ninth Circuit precedent holding that federal courts lack power to issue mandamus directing state courts, state judicial officers, or other state officials in performing their duties.

The court further stated that Sivak could appeal the fee-waiver rulings to the Ninth Circuit as circumstances warranted, but could not seek review by another judge in the district. It also said that the judge was absolutely immune from civil damages claims based on actions taken in her judicial capacity. Finally, the court concluded that the repetitive and frivolous filings did not provide a basis to question the judge's impartiality or require recusal.

Disposition

Judge Araceli Martinez-Olguin ordered that all the listed actions be dismissed with prejudice. The clerk was directed to terminate all pending motions and close the cases. Sivak was also prohibited from continuing to submit documents in the closed cases; motions not specifically permitted by law to be filed in closed cases would not be considered and would be returned to him. The order separately noted earlier related proceedings before Judge James Donato and an earlier order by Judge Martinez-Olguin involving similar filings.