Supastar Ware v. John Valley, et al.

Summary

The United States District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri denied Supastar Ware’s motion for reconsideration, motion for leave to amend, and request for a temporary restraining order. The court upheld its determination that Ware was subject to the three-strikes provision of 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g) and its severance of unrelated claims under Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 18, 20, and 21. The court also found that Ware had not shown an imminent constitutional violation or irreparable harm warranting injunctive relief.

Holdings

1. The court declined to reconsider its prior determination that Ware was subject to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g) and could not proceed in forma pauperis absent a showing of imminent danger of serious physical injury.
2. The court declined to reconsider its prior severance of claims that were unrelated to the claims identified on page 11 of the complaint.
3. Leave to amend was denied because Ware did not submit the proposed amended complaint, did not comply with the applicable local rule requiring use of a court-provided form, and sought to add unrelated claims.
4. Ware was not entitled to a temporary restraining order requiring vendor-provided meals or closure of the prison kitchen because he failed to show a constitutional violation, irreparable harm, a cognizable danger of future violation, or that the Dataphase factors favored relief.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the court should reconsider its prior determination that Ware was subject to the three-strikes provision of 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g).
2. Whether the court should reconsider its severance of unrelated claims under Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 18, 20, and 21.
3. Whether Ware should be granted leave to amend when he did not use the required court form, did not attach a proposed amended complaint, and sought to add unrelated claims.
4. Whether Ware was entitled to a temporary restraining order requiring vendor-provided meals and closure of the prison kitchen.

Disposition

other