Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled July 7, 2022

Spencer Nimham El Dey v. DOC

Judge
Laura Swain
Docket
1:22-cv-04028
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
Civil ProcedurePro Se
In one sentence

In Abdullah Spencer Nimham El Dey v. DOC, Judge Swain denied IFP and dismissed the complaint without prejudice under the three-strikes rule.

Who this affects

The order affects Abdullah Spencer Nimham El Dey's ability to file actions without paying the filing fee in the Southern District of New York while he is a prisoner, subject to the imminent-serious-injury exception.

What happened

Abdullah Spencer Nimham El Dey v. DOC involved a prisoner who filed the action without a lawyer and asked to proceed without paying the filing fee. The court had found that he previously filed at least three cases dismissed as frivolous, malicious, or for failing to state a claim.

The court ordered him to explain by declaration why the Prison Litigation Reform Act's three-strikes rule should not bar him from proceeding without paying the fee. He did not submit the required declaration within the time allowed.

Judge Laura Taylor Swain denied his request to proceed without paying the filing fee and dismissed the complaint without prejudice. The court also barred him from filing future actions without paying the fee in that court while he remains a prisoner, unless he faces an imminent threat of serious physical injury.

The detailed version

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

Case
Spencer Nimham El Dey v. DOC · No. 1:22-cv-04028
Judge
Laura Swain
Date
July 7, 2022

Background

Abdullah Spencer Nimham El Dey filed the action without a lawyer and requested permission to proceed without paying the filing fee. The court had previously determined that, while he was a prisoner, he had filed three or more cases that counted as "strikes" because they were dismissed as frivolous, malicious, or for failure to state a claim.

On May 31, 2022, the court ordered him to show cause by declaration why the Prison Litigation Reform Act's three-strikes provision, 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g), should not bar him from proceeding without paying the filing fee in future actions in that court while he was a prisoner. He did not file the required declaration within the permitted time.

Ruling

The court denied Abdullah Spencer Nimham El Dey's request to proceed without paying the filing fee and dismissed the complaint without prejudice under the three-strikes provision. The court barred him from filing future actions without paying the filing fee in that court while he is a prisoner, unless he is under an imminent threat of serious physical injury.

The court warned that submitting frivolous documents could lead to additional sanctions, including monetary penalties. It also certified that any appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied permission to proceed without paying the filing fee for an appeal. The opinion states that he could start a new action by paying the filing fee, after which any civil-rights complaint from a prisoner would be reviewed under the statutory screening process.

The authoritative version

Read the full 2-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.