BONTEMPS v. BAKER

No. 2:16-cv-2814-CMK-P.

GREGORY C. BONTEMPS, Plaintiff, v. BAKER, et al., Defendants.

United States District Court, E.D. California.

Editors Note
Applicable Law: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Cause: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Nature of Suit: 550 Prisoner: Civil Rights
Source: PACER


Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Gregory C. Bontemps, Plaintiff, Pro Se.


ORDER

CRAIG M. KELLISON, Magistrate Judge.

Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, brings this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff has consented to Magistrate Judge jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c) and no other party has been served or appeared in the action. The court issued an order to show cause on May 15, 2017, requiring plaintiff to show cause why this action should not be dismissed.

The court found it had previously determined plaintiff is barred from proceeding in forma pauperis pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1985(g), and that it did not appear that plaintiff was under imminent danger of serious physical injury when he filed the complaint. Plaintiff has filed a response to the order to show cause. In his response, plaintiff argues he is in imminent danger of serious physical injury as the correctional officers at California State Prison — Sacramento (CSP-Sac) continue to use excessive force against him. He claims this has been an on-going problem, and because he continues to be housed at CSP-Sac, he continues to be in danger of additional use of force against him. However, as set forth in the order to show cause, the use of excessive force he alleged in his complaint consisted of placing handcuffs on him in an unreasonable manner, causing pain in his wrists and marks on his skin. Plaintiff states he continues to be at risk of additional use of force, but fails to elaborate as to any specific incidents or any severe and/or dangerous use of force. The undersigned previously found incorrect placement of handcuffs is not severe enough to amount to an Eighth Amendment violation, much less to show plaintiff was in imminent danger of serious physical injury. Plaintiff offers nothing more serious in his response to the order to show cause and the undersigned finds plaintiff has not shown he has met the standard to proceed IFP.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. This action is dismissed without prejudice to re-filing upon pre-payment of the filing fees; and

2. The Clerk of the Court is directed to close this case.


Comment

1000 Characters Remaining

Leagle.com reserves the right to edit or remove comments but is under no obligation to do so, or to explain individual moderation decisions.

User Comments

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases