Ivan Lee Matthews, II v. The California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation

Summary

The court vacates its prior findings and recommendations after determining that two previously identified cases were filed by different plaintiffs with the same name. It issues updated findings and recommendations concluding that Plaintiff remains subject to the three-strikes bar under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g), does not qualify for the imminent-danger exception, and should be denied in forma pauperis status and required to prepay the filing fee.

Holdings

1. The May 19, 2025 findings and recommendations were vacated because two of the cases previously counted as strikes appeared to involve different plaintiffs with the same name.
2. Plaintiff remained subject to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g) because he had at least three prior actions dismissed for failure to state a claim.
3. Plaintiff did not qualify for the imminent-danger exception because his conclusory and unsupported allegations did not show a real, present, and proximate threat of serious physical injury when he filed the complaint.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the May 19, 2025 findings and recommendations should be vacated because two cases counted as strikes involved different plaintiffs with the same name.
2. Whether Plaintiff had at least three qualifying strikes under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g).
3. Whether Plaintiff qualified for the imminent-danger exception to the three-strikes bar.
4. Whether Plaintiff should be denied in forma pauperis status and required to prepay the filing fee.

Disposition

vacated