Jones v. City of Oakland

Background

Brandon Lawalter Jones brought a federal civil-rights action against the City of Oakland and other defendants. The court determined that he was barred from proceeding without paying the filing fee under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g), commonly called the “three-strikes” rule. That rule generally prevents a prisoner from bringing a federal civil action without paying the fee after three or more earlier federal actions or appeals were dismissed as frivolous, malicious, or for failure to state a claim, unless the prisoner faced imminent danger when filing the new action.

The court identified four earlier cases involving Jones as qualifying strikes. The order described the first as dismissed for failure to state a claim. It described the other three as dismissed after Jones failed to file amended complaints following earlier dismissals for failure to state a claim. The court also explained why those dismissals counted under controlling precedent, including dismissals by a magistrate judge and dismissals followed by a failure to amend.

Jones’s Response

The court had ordered Jones to explain why the action should not be dismissed under § 1915(g) and had informed him that he could avoid dismissal by paying the filing fee. Jones responded that he could not file adequate amended complaints in the earlier cases because of a bipolar crisis or because he was otherwise not mentally or physically capable of preparing them. He argued that these circumstances entitled him to the imminent-danger exception.

The court rejected that argument. It explained that the exception requires a showing of imminent danger when the current action was filed, not danger or incapacity during litigation of the earlier cases. The court found that Jones had not shown that the earlier cases did not qualify as strikes, that his earlier pleadings stated claims, or that he otherwise had a valid reason why those cases should not have been dismissed.

Ruling

Judge Richard Seeborg concluded that Jones had not paid the filing fee, had not shown that any identified strike failed to qualify, had not established the imminent-danger exception, and had not otherwise shown cause why the action should remain pending without payment. The court therefore revoked Jones’s status allowing him to proceed without paying the filing fee and dismissed the civil-rights action without prejudice to Jones bringing his claims in a new paid complaint. The Clerk was directed to terminate pending motions, enter judgment in favor of the defendants, and close the file.