Unpublished Disposition, 881 F.2d 1083 (9th Cir. 1989)

MEMORANDUM^* 

Keith D. Gilbert and others, Idaho state prisoners, appeal pro se the district court's dismissal of their consolidated civil rights complaints and actions. The plaintiffs moved to proceed in forma pauperis. The district court granted the motion, but dismissed the actions pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(d) on the ground that the actions were frivolous. We affirm.

We review for abuse of discretion the district court's decision to dismiss pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(d). The statute provides that the district court may dismiss an action in forma pauperis "if satisfied that the action is frivolous or malicious." The district court did not abuse its discretion. The consolidated actions claim that prison officials violated the plaintiffs' first amendment rights by prohibiting various activities and failing to accomodate requests for special treatment. The claims are patently frivolous. All of the actions of prison officials which plaintiffs' claim violated their first amendment rights were obviously taken for legitimate reasons of prison security. See Thomas v. Review Bd. of the Indiana Employment Sec. Div., 450 U.S. 707, 713 (1981).

In addition, the allegations, while based on different events, are qualitatively identical to the allegations made in McCabe v. Arave, 626 F. Supp. 1199 (D. Idaho 1986). Most of the prisoner plaintiffs are the same individuals who unsuccessfully sued prison officials in that case. This suit is a transparent attempt to circumvent the court's ruling in McCabe by identifying their religion as the "Restored Church of Jesus Christ Society of Saints" rather than as the "Church of Jesus Christ Christian," the purported religion of the plaintiffs in McCabe. Save for the name, the two religions are identical.

Allowing prisoners to repeatedly litigate this sort of claim would both burden the courts and undermine prison discipline. It would encourage prisoners to continue to violate prison rules and make unreasonable demands to set up new "test cases" for their frivolous legal claims. The district court need not indulge prisoners' use of its processes to harass prison officials and justify disruptive behavior.

AFFIRMED.