Free Order (PLRA) Three Strikes - District Court of Delaware - Delaware

Case 1:07-cv-00173-GMS Document 5 Filed O4/O9/2007 Page 1 of 3
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE
I
GBEKE MICHAEL AWALA, ) l
Plaintiff, g
v. g Civ. No. 07-173-***
PETER T. DALLEO, g
Defendant. g
ORDER
Plaintiff Gbeke Michael Awala ("AwaIa"), an inmate at the Moshannon Valley
Correctional Facility, Philipsburg, Pennsylvania, filed this action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §
1983. Awala proceeds pro se and has requested leave to proceed in forma pauperis
pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915. (D.l. 1.)
The Prison Litigation Reform Act ("PLRA") provides that a prisoner cannot bring
a new civil action or appeal a judgment in a civil action in forma pauperis if he has three
or more times in the past, while incarcerated, brought a civil action or appeal in federal
court that was dismissed as frivolous, malicious, or for failure to state a claim upon
which relief may be granted. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). A case dismissed as frivolous prior
to the enactment of the PLRA (i.e., April 26, 1996) is counted when applying the "three
strikes rule". Keener v. Pennsylvania Bd. of Probation & Parole, 128 F.3d 143 (3d Cir. l
1997). An exception is made to the "three strikes ruIe" when the prisoner is in imminent
danger of serious physical injury. Also, a prisoner who is not proceeding in forma
pauperis may tile a new civil action or appeal even if that prisoner has three or more
dismissals described in 28 U.S.C. 1915(g).

Case 1:07-cv-OO173—Gl\/IS Document 5 Filed 04/09/2007 Page 2 of 3 .
According to the records of the Federal Courts, while a prisoner Awala has filed
at least twenty civil actions in various federal courts. See Awala v. Delta Air Lines, No.
1:05-CV-2128-JEC (N.D.Ga. Aug. 31, 2005). More than three of these cases were
dismissed as frivolous or for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, _
as follows: Awala v. Federal Public Defenden No. 05-4341 (3d. Cir. Apr. 21, 2006);
Awala v. Wachovia Corp., No. 05-3381 (3d. Cir. Dec. 8, 2005); Awala v. People Who
Want to Restrict Our First Amendment Rights, No. 05-3863 (3d Cir. Dec. 8, 2005);
Awala v. 8 U.S. C. § 1326, Civ. No. 06-012-KAJ (D.Del. l\/lar. 17, 2006); Awala v.
Stratton, No. 05-472-KAJ (D.Del. ll/lar. 3, 2006); Awala v. U.S. Congress, Civ. No. 05-
307-KAJ (D.Del. Dec. 15, 2005); Awala v. Delaware River and Bay Authority Police
Dep't, No. 05-97-KAJ (D. Del. Dec. 15, 2005); Awala v. State of New Jersey Dep’t of
Corrections, No. Civ.A. 05-2362FLW (D.N.J. Aug. 23, 2005). I.
As a result, Awala may not file another civil action in forma pauperis while
incarcerated unless he is in "imminent danger of serious physical injury" at the time of
the filing of his complaint. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g); Abdul-Akbar v. ll/lcKelvie, 239 F.3d
. 307, 311 (3d Cir. 2001). His complaint does not meet that standard. Hence, he is not
excused from the restrictions under § 1915(g), and he may not proceed in forma
pauperis. l
THEREFORE, at Wilmington this i day of April, 2007, IT IS HEREBY
ORDERED that:
1. Awala’s motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis (D.I. 1) is DENIED.
2. Awala is given thirty (30) days from the date of this order to pay the
-2-

Case 1:07-cv-OO173—Gl\/IS Document 5 Filed O4/O9/2007 Page 3 of 3
i
$350.00 filing fee. If he does not paythe Hling fee within that time, the complaint shall
be dismissed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). i
l
f · 1
git l r
‘ . •` ary Pa ge a
agistrate Ju ge p
l
l
l
i
l
-3-