LENIN GARCIA V. GINA PICKETT, No. 16-56302 (9th Cir. 2017)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FILED OCT 5 2017 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT LENIN GARCIA, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS No. 16-56302 Plaintiff-Appellant, D.C. No. 3:16-cv-01606-CAB-BGS v. MEMORANDUM* GINA PICKETT, Correctional Counselor I; et al., Defendants-Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of California Cathy Ann Bencivengo, District Judge, Presiding Submitted September 26, 2017** Before: SILVERMAN, TALLMAN, and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges. California state prisoner Lenin Garcia appeals pro se from the district court’s order dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action for failure to pay the filing fee after denying Garcia’s application to proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP”) on the basis that Garcia has three strikes under the Prison Litigation Reform Act, 28 U.S.C. * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3. ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). § 1915(g). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo. Washington v. L.A. Cty. Sheriff’s Dep’t, 833 F.3d 1048, 1054 (9th Cir. 2016). We affirm. The district court properly dismissed Garcia’s action because three of Garcia’s prior federal actions constitute strikes, and Garcia failed to pay the filing fee. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g) (precluding prisoner from proceeding IFP where prisoner has previously brought three or more actions or appeals that were dismissed as frivolous, malicious, or for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted); Andrews v. King, 398 F.3d 1113, 1121 (9th Cir. 2005) (defining “frivolous” as having no basis in law or fact). AFFIRMED. 2 16-56302

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.