United States District Court, C.D. Illinois
December 5, 2005.
DUKHAN MUMIM, Plaintiff,
KENNETH R. BRILEY, et al., Defendants.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: HAROLD BAKER, District Judge
The plaintiff, a state prisoner, has submitted a civil rights
complaint under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 which names 36 different
defendants at both Stateville Correctional Center and Illinois
River Correctional Center. The plaintiff also filed a motion to
proceed in forma pauperis.
The plaintiff's complaint is on a standard complaint form which
asks the plaintiff to fill out specific sections. In one section,
the plaintiff is asked to list ALL previous lawsuits he has filed
in any state of federal court and to state the final outcome in
each of those lawsuits. (Comp., p 5). The plaintiff was
specifically admonished that:
[i]f you have filed more than one lawsuit, then you
must describe the additional lawsuits on another
piece of paper using this same format. Regardless of
how many cases you have previously filed, you will
not be excused from filling out this section
completely, and failure to do so may result in the
dismissal of your lawsuit. (Comp, p. 5)
The plaintiff listed one pending lawsuit he had filed in a
Federal District Court in Nebraska. However, the plaintiff failed
to mention that he has filed twenty-five separate lawsuits. In
addition, the plaintiff is well aware that he was restricted from
proceeding in forma pauperis. Title 28, United States Code,
Section 1915, provides in relevant part:
In no event shall a prisoner bring a civil action or
appeal a judgment in a civil action or proceeding
under this section if the prisoner has, on 3 or more
prior occasions, while incarcerated or detained in
any facility, brought an action or appeal in a court
of the United States that was dismissed on the
grounds that it is frivolous, malicious, or fails to
state a claim upon which relief may be granted,
unless the prisoner is under imminent danger of
serious physical injury. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g).
The plaintiff had at least three lawsuits dismissed for failure
to state a claim upon which relief could be granted and was
specifically dismissed from a multi-plaintiff action after the
court informed the plaintiff that he had already accumulated
three strikes and could not proceed in forma pauperis. (See
Fisher, et. al, v. Clarke, et. al., 2001 cv 3149). Neither the plaintiff's motion to proceed in forma pauperis nor
his complaint makes reference to these earlier rulings.
Therefore, the plaintiff's in forma pauperis motion is denied.
[d/e 1] In addition, the case is dismissed. The court agrees with
the reasoning in Sloan v. Lesza. 181 F.3d 857
, 859 (7th Cir.
1999) which states:
An effort to bamboozle the court by seeking
permission to proceed in forma pauperis after a
federal judge has held that § 195(g) applies to a
particular litigant will lead to immediate
termination of the suit.
Furthermore, the until the plaintiff has paid in full the
outstanding fees in all civil actions he has filed, the clerk of
the court will return unfiled all papers he tenders. See
Sloan, 181 F.3d 857
; Support Systems International, Inc. v.
Mack, 45 F.3d 185
(7th Cir. 1995).
Lastly, the court notes that in the section of the complaint
which asks if the plaintiff has exhausted his administrative
remedies, the plaintiff states that there is no grievance
procedure at either of the state correctional facilities. The
court takes judicial notice of the fact that the Illinois
Department of Corrections has a well-established grievance
procedure. The plaintiff is advised that he must exhaust his
administrative remedies for each intended claim before he can
file a lawsuit.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that:
(1) The plaintiff's motion to proceed in forma
pauperis is denied. [d/e 1]
(2) The plaintiff's complaint is dismissed in its
entirety for the plaintiff's failure to inform the
court that he had "struck out" under
28 U.S.C. § 1915(g);
(3) The clerk of the court is directed to add the
plaintiff's name to the list of plaintiff's who have
accumulated three strikes.
(4) The agency having custody of the plaintiff is
directed to remit the docketing fee of $250.00 from
the plaintiff's prison trust fund account if such
funds are available. If the plaintiff does not have
$250.00 in his trust fund account, the agency must
send 20 percent of the current balance, or the
average balance during the past six months, whichever
amount is higher. Thereafter, the agency shall begin
forwarding monthly payments from the plaintiff's
trust fund account to the clerk of court each time
the plaintiff's account exceeds $10.00 until the
statutory fee of $250.00 is paid in its entirety. The
filing fee collected shall not exceed the statutory
filing fee of $250.00.
(5) The plaintiff shall notify the clerk of the court
of a change of address within seven days of such
change. Release from incarceration does not relieve
the plaintiff of his obligation to pay the filing fee
in full. (6) The clerk is directed to mail a copy of this
order to the plaintiff's place of confinement, to the
attention of the Trust Fund Office.
(7) all other pending motions are denied as moot. [3,
(8) The clerk of the court is directed to return
unfiled all papers tendered by this plaintiff until
the plaintiff has paid in full the outstanding fees
in all civil actions he has filed. See Sloan,
181 F.3d 857; Support Systems International, Inc. v.
Mack, 45 F.3d 185 (7th Cir. 1995).
© 1992-2006 VersusLaw Inc.