Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
Back to docket
N.D. Cal.Procedural orderFiled Jan. 25, 2021

Roberts v. Monterey County Jail

Judge
Susan Illston
Docket
3:20-cv-06113
Court
U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
Pages
3
Civil RightsSection 1983Pro SeCivil Procedure
In one sentence

In Roberts v. Monterey County Jail, Magistrate Judge Illman ordered Roberts to explain possible filing-fee restrictions or pay the full fee.

Who this affects

David Roberts, whose request to proceed without paying the filing fee upfront was questioned and who was required either to respond within 28 days or pay the full $402 filing fee; the case could be dismissed if he did neither.

What happened

In Roberts v. Monterey County Jail, David Roberts, a former detainee and current state prisoner, filed a civil-rights lawsuit without a lawyer and asked to proceed without paying the filing fee upfront.

The court identified at least three earlier cases that may count as “strikes” under a federal law limiting fee-free lawsuits by prisoners. Roberts was given 28 days to explain why that restriction should not apply. He could instead avoid possible dismissal by paying the full $402 filing fee; the court did not dismiss the case in this order.

Magistrate Judge Robert M. Illman issued the order on January 25, 2021, requiring Roberts to show cause or pay the full fee. Failure to do either may result in dismissal.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
Roberts v. Monterey County Jail · No. 3:20-cv-06113
Judge
Susan Illston
Date
Jan. 25, 2021

Background

David Roberts, identified as a former detainee at the Monterey County Jail and a current state prisoner, filed a civil-rights complaint under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 without a lawyer. He also applied to proceed without paying the filing fee upfront.

Potential filing-fee bar

The court discussed the Prison Litigation Reform Act’s “three-strikes” rule, 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). That rule generally prevents a prisoner from proceeding without paying the filing fee if the prisoner previously brought at least three federal actions or appeals that were dismissed as frivolous, malicious, or for failing to state a legally sufficient claim, unless the prisoner faced an imminent danger of serious physical injury.

The court identified at least five earlier cases involving Roberts that appeared potentially to qualify as strikes. The listed cases were dismissed for failure to state a claim, or as frivolous, malicious, or for failure to state a claim. The court explained that Roberts had to receive notice and an opportunity to respond before the court could determine that the three-strikes rule barred his fee-free status.

Order

The court ordered Roberts to show cause within 28 days after the order was served why the case should not be treated as barred by the three-strikes rule and why his application to proceed without paying the fee upfront should not be denied, resulting in dismissal. Alternatively, Roberts could avoid possible dismissal by paying the full $402 filing fee within the deadline. The court stated that failing either to show cause or to pay the full fee may result in dismissal. This order did not itself dismiss the case or finally decide Roberts’s civil-rights claims. Magistrate Judge Robert M. Illman issued the order.

The authoritative version

Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.