Steven Wayne Bonilla v. Alameda County, Prosecutors for Good Fellow and John Whitson

Summary

The United States District Court for the Southern District of California dismissed Steven Wayne Bonilla’s 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action for failure to pay the required filing fee or properly seek in forma pauperis status. The court also determined that Bonilla had accumulated more than three qualifying strikes under the Prison Litigation Reform Act and had not plausibly alleged imminent danger of serious physical injury.

Holdings

1. A civil action may not proceed when the plaintiff has neither paid the required filing fee nor obtained leave to proceed in forma pauperis. Because Bonilla did neither, dismissal was warranted.
2. A prisoner who has accumulated three or more qualifying dismissals may not proceed in forma pauperis in a subsequent civil action unless the prisoner satisfies the imminent-danger exception.
3. Plaintiff did not qualify for the imminent-danger exception because his allegations concerning the arrest warrant, grand-jury subpoena, and discriminatory prosecution did not plausibly allege that he faced imminent danger of serious physical injury when he filed the complaint.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the action could proceed when Plaintiff had not paid the filing fee required by 28 U.S.C. § 1914(a) and had not filed a properly supported motion to proceed in forma pauperis.
2. Whether Plaintiff was barred from proceeding in forma pauperis under the PLRA three-strikes provision, 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g).
3. Whether Plaintiff plausibly alleged that he faced imminent danger of serious physical injury so as to qualify for the exception to the PLRA three-strikes bar.

Disposition

dismissed