Luevano v. U.S. Supreme et al, No. 7:2012cv00275 - Document 2 (W.D. Va. 2012)
Court Description: MEMORANDUM OPINION. Signed by Judge Norman K. Moon on 07/19/2012. (kab)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA ROANOKE DIVISION JAIME LUEVANO, Petitioner, v. U.S. SUPREME, et al., Respondent. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Civil Action No. 7:12cv00275 MEMORANDUM OPINION By: Norman K. Moon United States District Judge Plaintiff Jaime Luevano, a Texas prisoner proceeding pro se, filed this petition for writ of mandamus to compel investigation. Luevano has not submitted a filing fee with his petition and, therefore, the court liberally construes his action as a request to proceed in forma pauperis. However, at least three of Luevano s previous actions or appeals have been dismissed as frivolous or for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted.1 Therefore, Luevano may not proceed with this action unless he either pays the $350.00 filing fee or shows that he is under imminent danger of serious physical injury. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). As Luevano has neither prepaid the filing fee nor demonstrated that he is under imminent danger of serious physical injury, 2 the court dismisses his complaint without prejudice pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). The Clerk is directed to send a certified copy of this Memorandum Opinion and the accompanying Order to the plaintiff. ENTER: This 19th day of July, 2012. 1 See Luevano v. Bd. Of Disciplinary Appeals, et al, 5:08cv107 (W.D. Tex. Mar. 20, 2008 (dismissed with prejudice as frivolous and for failure to state a claim; no appeal was taken); Luevano v. Perry, et al., 1:07cv1026 (W.D. Tex. Jan. 18, 2008) (dismissed as frivolous; no appeal was taken); Luevano v. Chief John Doe, 1:07cv1025 (W.D. Tex. Jan. 18, 2008) (dismissed as frivolous; no appeal was taken). 2 Luevano names the United States Supreme Court, the Fifth Circuit, U.S. Texas judges, and Texas state judges as respondents to this action and asks the court to compel investigation in[to] . . . the ongoing problem that the U.S. Supreme [Court] . . . keep[s] sending the same reply back [to Luevano] and the Circuit of Fifth [sic] that didn t file the appeals of Texas to protect and cover-up a vast massive family ring mob . . . in El Paso, Texas . . . for over 4 years. . . . Luevano attaches a copy of a letter to him from the Supreme Court of the United States dated December 13, 2007, which states that Luevano s petition for writ of certiorari was received by the Court but that it was being returned to him because he must first seek review by a United States court of appeals or by the highest state court in which a decision could be had. The court finds that Luevano has not demonstrated that he is in imminent danger of serious physical harm.