Young v. Allison

Background

Zuri Sana-Kabisa Young, identified as a state prisoner, filed a civil-rights action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and asked to proceed without paying the filing fee. The court had identified six earlier federal actions that appeared to qualify as “strikes” under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). That statute generally prevents a prisoner from proceeding without paying the filing fee after three or more qualifying actions or appeals have been dismissed as frivolous, malicious, or for failing to state a claim, unless the prisoner shows an imminent danger of serious physical injury.

The court explained that the six identified dismissals qualified as strikes under applicable Ninth Circuit precedent. They included dismissals for failure to state a claim, a legally apparent bar to the claim, failure to file an amended complaint after receiving permission to amend, and failure to correct an overly lengthy complaint after being given an opportunity to do so. The court also noted that the Ninth Circuit had recognized on two occasions that Young had accumulated at least three strikes.

Proceedings and Ruling

The court ordered Young to show cause—meaning to explain—why the filing-fee restriction should not apply. Young filed no response. He also did not pay the filing fee, show that any identified strike was improperly counted, establish that he qualified for the imminent-danger exception, or otherwise explain why the case should remain pending without payment.

The court denied Young’s application to proceed without paying the filing fee. It dismissed the federal civil-rights action without prejudice to Young 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.

Judge Liam H. Orrick’s order addressed Young’s eligibility to proceed without paying the filing fee and did not decide the underlying civil-rights claims.