Ponder v. Bloodsaw et al.

Summary

The United States District Court for the Middle District of Georgia dismissed Jeremiah D. Ponder’s 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action without prejudice because he had at least three qualifying strikes under the Prison Litigation Reform Act and had not alleged imminent danger of serious physical injury. The court also noted that the action appeared untimely, failed to state a claim, and sought unavailable relief.

Holdings

1. A prisoner with three prior federal actions or appeals dismissed as frivolous, malicious, or for failure to state a claim may not proceed in forma pauperis unless the complaint alleges that the prisoner was under imminent danger of serious physical injury. Ponder had at least three qualifying strikes and did not allege facts establishing that exception.
2. When a prisoner is denied in forma pauperis status under § 1915(g), the action must be dismissed without prejudice rather than allowing the prisoner to pay the filing fee after filing.
3. The court did not need to decide the limitations issue, but observed that the action could also be dismissed as frivolous because the alleged event occurred nearly four years before filing and § 1983 claims in Georgia generally use a two-year limitations period.

Questions Presented

1. Whether 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g) barred Ponder from proceeding in forma pauperis because he had at least three prior qualifying dismissals and had not alleged imminent danger of serious physical injury.
2. Whether dismissal without prejudice was the proper disposition after denial of in forma pauperis status.
3. Whether the complaint was independently subject to dismissal as untimely or for failure to state a claim.

Disposition

dismissed