Bonilla v. Reynolds

Background

Bonilla, a state prisoner, filed multiple complaints without a lawyer under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, the federal civil-rights statute for certain claims against government actors. The order lists numerous related case numbers. The complaints were nearly identical and named various federal judges, state judges, and state courts as defendants. Bonilla sought relief concerning his underlying conviction and the way his other cases had been handled.

The order states that Bonilla had a pending federal petition challenging his custody, Case No. 08-0471 YGR, in which he had appointed counsel. It also states that he was represented by counsel in state proceedings concerning his custody.

Rulings

The court determined that Bonilla was barred from proceeding without paying filing fees under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g), unless he showed that he was under imminent danger of serious physical injury when he filed his complaints. The court found that the allegations did not show such danger. As a result, Bonilla could not proceed without paying those fees.

The court further stated that, even if an application to proceed without paying fees had been granted, the lawsuits would be barred under the rules and doctrines discussed in Heck v. Humphrey, Younger v. Harris, Demos v. U.S. District Court, and Mullis v. U.S. Bankruptcy Court. The court therefore dismissed the cases with prejudice. The order also stated that the repetitive and frivolous nature of the filings did not provide a basis to question the assigned judge’s impartiality.

Disposition

The clerk was ordered to terminate all pending motions and close the cases. The clerk was also ordered to return, without filing, any further documents Bonilla submitted in the closed cases.

Classification rationale

This is a procedural order. The court did not decide the underlying civil-rights claims on their merits. Instead, it ruled that Bonilla could not proceed without paying fees and that the lawsuits were barred by threshold or other procedural doctrines.