Price v. Third Judicial District of Kansas

• Court: District Court, D. Kansas
• Decided: March 28, 2025
• Docket: 5:25-cv-03053
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF KANSAS

JOHN TIMOTHY PRICE,

Plaintiff,

v. CASE NO. 25-3053-JWL

THIRD JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF KANSAS, et al.,

Defendants.

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER Plaintiff John Timothy Price is currently in custody at the Douglas County Jail in Lawrence, Kansas. Plaintiff filed this § 1983 action against the Third and Seventh Judicial Districts of Kansas, alleging issues involving taxes on telecommunications devices, internet access, and electronic commerce. (Doc. 1.) Plaintiff also claims that the there is an improper grievance system because there is no proper way to use the form provided in the facility. Plaintiff has filed a motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis. (Doc. 2.) He is subject, however, to the “three-strikes” provision under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). Court records establish that Plaintiff “has, on 3 or more prior occasions, while incarcerated . . . , 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.”1 Thus, he may proceed in forma pauperis only if he establishes a threat of imminent danger of serious physical injury. Id.

1 Prior to filing the instant complaint, the Court finds at least 3 prior civil actions filed by Plaintiff which qualify as “strikes” under § 1915(g). See Price v. Dixon, et al., Case No. 21-cv-3283-SAC (D. Kan. March 17, 2022) (dismissed for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted); Price v. Kagay, et al., Case No. 22-cv-3003-SAC (D. Kan. March 17, 2022) (same); Price v. Blount County, Alabama, Case No. 22-cv-3059-SAC (D. Kan. April 21, 2022) (same). “To satisfy § 1915(g), a prisoner must present “specific, credible allegations of imminent danger of serious physical harm.’” Johnson v. Little, 852 Fed. Appx 369, 371 (10th Cir. 2021) (unpublished) (quoting Kinnell v. Graves, 265 F.3d 1125, 1128 (10th Cir. 2001) (internal quotation marks omitted)). The Court has carefully considered the Complaint filed in this matter and finds no such specific allegations. There is nothing in the Complaint that shows that Plaintiff is in

imminent danger of serious physical harm. Accordingly, pursuant to § 1915(g), Plaintiff may not proceed in forma pauperis in this civil action. Plaintiff is given time to pay the full $405.00 district court filing fee2 to the Court. If the full filing fee is not paid within the prescribed time, the Complaint will be dismissed based upon Plaintiff’s failure to satisfy the statutory district court filing fee required by 28 U.S.C. § 1914. IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED BY THE COURT that the motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis (Doc. 2) is denied. Plaintiff is granted until April 25, 2025, to submit the $405.00 filing fee. The failure to submit the fee by that date will result in the dismissal of this matter without prejudice and without additional prior notice.

IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated March 28, 2025, in Kansas City, Kansas. S/ John W. Lungstrum JOHN W. LUNGSTRUM UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

2 If a person is not granted in forma pauperis status under § 1915, the fee to file a non-habeas civil action includes the $350.00 fee required by 28 U.S.C. § 1914(a) and a $55.00 general administrative fee pursuant to § 1914(b) and the District Court Miscellaneous Fee Schedule prescribed by the Judicial Conference of the United States.