Williams v. Gibson

Docket 4:24-cv-00483

Filed
2024-06-05
Terminated
2024-07-08
Case type
cv

Outcome

No sourced outcome is recorded. A termination date alone does not establish who prevailed.

Parties and representation

      Party and firm records are not available for this case.

      Panel

        No sourced panel votes are recorded.

        Opinions and documents

        IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS CENTRAL DIVISION THELMA WILLIAMS PLAINTIFF ADC #093197 V. NO. 4:24-cv-00483-BRW JAMES GIBSON, et al. DEFENDANTS ORDER OF DISMISSAL On June 5, 2024, pro se plaintiff Thelma Williams, an Arkansas Division of Correction (“ADC”) inmate, filed this action under 42 U.S.C. ' 1983.1 Because Mr. Williams is a “three- striker,”2 he can proceed in forma pauperis only if he is currently in imminent danger of serious physical injury. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g); Ashley v. Dilworth, 147 F.3d 715, 717 (8th Cir. 1998). Mr. Williams alleges that, on two occasions, ADC officials confiscated his clothing. These alleged facts and claims are insufficient to reasonably suggest that Mr. Williams faces an imminent danger of serious physical injury. Based on Mr. Williams’ status as a three-striker and his failure satisfy the imminent- danger-of-serious-physical-injury standard, he was ordered to pay the $405.00 filing fee within 30 days in an Order filed on June 7, 2024.3 The Order specifically cautioned Mr. Williams that his failure to pay the filing fee would result in dismissal of his claims, without prejudice. 1 Doc. 1. 2 The following dismissals are “strikes” for purposes of 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g): Williams v. Gibson, et al., E.D. Ark. Case No. 5:07-cv-00178-HW (Aug. 13, 2007 dismissal for failure to state a claim); Williams v. Bennett, et al., E.D. Ark. Case No. 5:07-cv-00179-JMM (Aug. 17, 2007 dismissal for same); Williams v. Smallwood, et al., E.D. Ark. Case No. 5:07-cv-00181-JMM (Sept. 13, 2007 dismissal for same); and Williams v. White, et al., E.D. Ark. Case No. 5:10-cv-00361- BSM (May 13, 2011 dismissal for same). 3 Doc. 2. To date, Mr. Williams has not complied with the Court’s June 7, 2024 Order to pay the filing fee, and the time for doing so has passed. I withdraw the reference. Mr. Williams’ complaint is DISMISSED, without prejudice, based on his failure to: (1) comply with the Court’s June 7, 2024 Order requiring him to pay the filing fee; and (2) prosecute this lawsuit. The Clerk of the Court is instructed to close this case. All pending motions are DENIED, as moot.4 IT IS SO ORDERED, this 8th day of July, 2024. Billy Roy Wilson__________________ UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 4 Doc. Nos. 8, 9, 10, 11, 17, 18, 19.

        Not legal advice. These patterns come from public court records, not ratings of judges as people. They may reflect the types of cases a judge handles, local procedures or other factors, and they do not account for the facts of any individual case. Past patterns do not predict future rulings. Records can be incomplete, months behind current activity, or matched to the wrong person; sealed and confidential cases are not included. Use this as one piece of information, never the sole basis for legal strategy or a recusal motion. Full disclaimer: https://judgefinder.io/legal/disclaimer Read the full disclaimer.