Sinegal v. Cates

W.D. Louisiana

Sinegal v. Cates

DecidedJune 25, 2025

Docket6:25-cv-00433

StatusUnknown

This text of Sinegal v. Cates (Sinegal v. Cates) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, W.D. Louisiana primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Sinegal v. Cates, (W.D. La. 2025).

Pincite

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA LAFAYETTE DIVISION

ROBERT F. SINEGAL CASE NO. 6:25-CV-00433 SEC P VERSUS JUDGE ROBERT R. SUMMERHAYS IRVIN CATES, ET AL. MAGISTRATE JUDGE WHITEHURST

JUDGMENT For the reasons stated in the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge previously filed herein, and after an independent review of the record, determining that the findings are correct under the applicable law, and considering the objections to the Report and Recommendation in the record; IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the instant suit be DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE as frivolous, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1915(e)(2)(B)(i) and 1915A(b)(1). IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that all pending motions [see ECF Nos. 4, 5, 10, 11, 15, 16 and 23] be DENIED as MOOT. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of Court provide a copy of this Judgment to the manager of the Three Strikes List in Tyler, Texas. Sinegal is hereby placed on NOTICE that this Judgment constitutes a strike under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). As Sinegal now has four strikes,' he is BARRED from proceeding in forma

' See Case No. 6:24-cv-1792, ECF No. 30; Case No. 6:25-cv-369, ECF No. 46; Case No. 6:25-cv-572, ECF No. 19.

pauperis in any civil action or appeal filed while he is incarcerated or detained unless he is under imminent danger of serious physical injury.”

SIGNED in chambers this | day of June, 2025.

ROBERT R. SUMM YS UNITED STATES DISTRIC GE

2 See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g); McGarrah v. Alford, 783 F.3d 584, 585 (Sth Cir. 2015). Page 2 of 2

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA LAFAYETTE DIVISION

ROBERT F. SINEGAL CASE NO. 6:25-CV-00433 SEC P VERSUS JUDGE ROBERT R. SUMMERHAYS IRVIN CATES, ET AL. MAGISTRATE JUDGE WHITEHURST

JUDGMENT For the reasons stated in the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge previously filed herein, and after an independent review of the record, determining that the findings are correct under the applicable law, and considering the objections to the Report and Recommendation in the record; IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the instant suit be DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE as frivolous, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1915(e)(2)(B)(i) and 1915A(b)(1). IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that all pending motions [see ECF Nos. 4, 5, 10, 11, 15, 16 and 23] be DENIED as MOOT. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of Court provide a copy of this Judgment to the manager of the Three Strikes List in Tyler, Texas. Sinegal is hereby placed on NOTICE that this Judgment constitutes a strike under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). As Sinegal now has four strikes,' he is BARRED from proceeding in forma

' See Case No. 6:24-cv-1792, ECF No. 30; Case No. 6:25-cv-369, ECF No. 46; Case No. 6:25-cv-572, ECF No. 19.

pauperis in any civil action or appeal filed while he is incarcerated or detained unless he is under imminent danger of serious physical injury.”

SIGNED in chambers this | day of June, 2025.

ROBERT R. SUMM YS UNITED STATES DISTRIC GE

2 See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g); McGarrah v. Alford, 783 F.3d 584, 585 (Sth Cir. 2015). Page 2 of 2

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Sinegal v. Cates, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/sinegal-v-cates-lawd-2025.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack