Hicks v. Yeh

Background

Michael J. Hicks, a state prisoner incarcerated at Salinas Valley State Prison, filed a civil-rights complaint under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against Michael Yeh and other defendants. He alleged that the defendants were deliberately indifferent to his medical needs. Hicks represented himself and requested permission to proceed without paying the filing fee.

Hicks acknowledged that he was subject to the Prison Litigation Reform Act's “three strikes” restriction. Under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g), a prisoner who has had three or more federal cases or appeals dismissed as frivolous, malicious, or for failure to state a claim generally cannot proceed without paying the filing fee unless the prisoner shows an imminent danger of serious physical injury.

Earlier proceedings

Judge James Donato ordered Hicks to explain why the case should not be barred under the three-strikes rule or, alternatively, to pay the full $402 filing fee. After reviewing Hicks's responses, Judge Donato found that five of Hicks's earlier cases qualified as strikes. Judge Donato also found that Hicks had not shown an imminent danger of serious physical injury. The court noted that Hicks was receiving medical treatment, although he disagreed with that treatment, and that he had received medication and was waiting to see a neurosurgeon.

Judge Donato denied Hicks's request to proceed without paying and again gave him 28 days to pay the full filing fee. Instead of paying, Hicks appealed the denial to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. The Ninth Circuit denied his request to proceed without paying the appellate fees, ordered him to pay $505, and later dismissed the appeal for failure to prosecute after he did not respond. The appellate mandate then issued.

Ruling

After the appeal was dismissed, Judge Araceli Martinez-Olguin reviewed the district-court case. The judge noted that Hicks had been given an opportunity to address the three-strikes issue, that Judge Donato had denied his request to proceed without paying, and that Hicks had not paid the required filing fee by the deadline.

The court dismissed the action without prejudice to Hicks's refiling his claims in a new case in which he pays the filing fee. The court also struck the complaint, directed the Clerk to terminate all pending motions, and closed the file. The court stated that it did not need to address the separate exhaustion issue raised by Judge Donato.