Conlin v. Embarq Payphone Services, Inc. et al, No. 1:2009cv01000 - Document 9 (E.D. Tex. 2009)
Court Description: MEMORANDUM OPINION that this case will dismissed without prejudice pursuant to28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). Signed by Judge Thad Heartfield on 12/17/09. (pkb, )
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS BEAUMONT DIVISION JEREMY LEE CONLIN § VS. § EMBARQ PAYPHONE SERVICES, INC., ET AL. § CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:09cv1000 MEMORANDUM OPINION Plaintiff Jeremy Lee Conlin, an inmate confined at the Stiles Unit of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Correctional Institutions Division, proceeding pro se, brings this action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against Embarq Payphone Services, Inc., Rick Thaler, and Christina Melton Crain. Discussion Plaintiff complains that the prison telephone policy requires individuals who wish to receive calls from inmates through the inmate payphone service to register their telephone numbers with prison officials. Plaintiff claims that this constitutes a prior restraint on inmates' rights to free speech. Plaintiff is requesting permission to proceed in forma pauperis. Analysis Title 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g) prohibits prisoners from repeatedly filing frivolous or malicious complaints. Section 1915(g) provides as follows: In no event shall a prisoner bring a civil action or appeal a judgment in a civil action [in forma pauperis] . . . if the prisoner has, on 3 or more prior occasions, while incarcerated or detained in any facility, 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, unless the prisoner is under imminent danger of serious physical injury. At least three of plaintiff's prior suits or appeals have been dismissed as frivolous or for failure to state a claim.1 As a result, Section 1915(g) is applicable. As set forth above, plaintiff has had at least three prior lawsuits or appeals dismissed as frivolous, malicious, and for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. The allegations set forth in plaintiff's complaint do not demonstrate that he was in "imminent danger of serious physical injury." Section 1915(g) therefore bars plaintiff from proceeding with this lawsuit on an in forma pauperis basis. Conclusion For the reasons set forth above, this action will be dismissed without prejudice pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). An appropriate final judgment shall be entered in accordance with this Memorandum Opinion. SIGNED this the 17 day of December, 2009. ____________________________ Thad Heartfield United States District Judge 1 See Conlin v. Davis, No. 4:06cv3305 (S.D. Tex. Oct. 23, 2006) (dismissed as frivolous and for failure to state a claim); Conlin v. Lange, No. 4:06cv1817 (S.D. Tex. Nov. 7, 2006) (dismissed as frivolous); and Conlin v. Quarterman, No. 1:08cv175 (E.D. Tex. Mar. 6, 2009) (dismissed as frivolous and for failure to state a claim).
]]>
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.
