United States District Court, N.D. Indiana
OPINION AND ORDER
THERESA L. SPRINGMANN CHIEF JUDGE
Sheneman, a pro se prisoner, filed a Complaint [ECF No. 1]
and a Motion for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis [ECF No.
2]. However, Sheneman is barred from proceeding in forma
pauperis pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). This is
commonly known as the “Three Strikes Rule” and
Sheneman has three strikes. An inmate who has struck out
“can use the partial prepayment option in §1915(b)
only if in the future he ‘is under imminent danger of
serious physical injury.'” Abdul-Wadood v.
Nathan, 91 F.3d 1023, 1025 (7th Cir. 1996). In order to
meet the imminent danger standard, the threat complained of
must be real and proximate. Ciarpaglini v. Saini,
352 F.3d 328, 330 (7th Cir. 2003). Only “genuine
emergencies” qualify as a basis for circumventing
§ 1915(g). Lewis v. Sullivan, 279 F.3d 526, 531
(7th Cir. 2002).
case, Sheneman is attempting to sue United States District
Court Judge Jon DeGuilio. He is asking for a writ of mandamus
compelling Judge DeGuilio to rule for him in Sheneman v.
Brook, 3:17-CV-124 (N.D. Ind. filed February 14, 2017),
in which he asked for an order requiring the prosecution of
three people: the two Assistant United States Attorneys who
prosecuted the federal criminal case against him and his
criminal defense attorney in that case. This case does not
allege that Sheneman is in imminent danger. Moreover, this
case is frivolous because Federal Rule of Civil Procedure
81(b) abolished writs of mandamus in the district courts.
“A party petitioning for a writ of mandamus or
prohibition directed to a court must file a petition with the
circuit clerk . . . .” Federal Rule of Appellate
Procedure 21(a)(1). Therefore he cannot proceed in forma
pauperis and this case qualifies as another strike.
Sheneman filed an in forma pauperis petition, even though he
he was struck out. The Seventh Circuit requires that
litigants be restricted when they attempt to
“bamboozle” the court by seeking to proceed in
forma pauperis after they have been informed that they are
barred from doing so.
Litigants to whom § 1915(g) applies take heed! An effort
to bamboozle the court by seeking permission to proceed in
forma pauperis after a federal judge has held that §
1915(g) applies to a particular litigant will lead to
immediate termination of the suit. Moreover, the fee remains
due, and we held in Newlin v. Helman, 123 F.3d 429,
436-37 (7th Cir. 1997), that unpaid docket fees incurred by
litigants subject to § 1915(g) lead straight to an order
forbidding further litigation. Sloan's appeal is
dismissed for failure to pay the appellate filing and docket
fees. Until Sloan has paid in full all outstanding fees and
sanctions in all civil actions he has filed, the clerks of
all courts in this circuit will return unfiled all papers he
tenders. This order does not apply to criminal cases or
petitions challenging the terms of his confinement, and may
be reexamined in two years under the approach of
Newlin and Support Systems International, Inc.
v. Mack, 45 F.3d 185 (7th Cir. 1995).
Sloan v. Lesza, 181 F.3d 857, 859 (7th Cir. 1999).
this case will be dismissed, the filing fee assessed, and
Sheneman restricted until he has paid in full all outstanding
filing fees and sanctions imposed by any federal court. The
restriction imposed by this order does not restrict him from
filing a notice of appeal nor “impede him from making
any filings necessary to protect him from imprisonment or
other confinement, but . . . [it does] not let him file any
paper in any other suit . . . until he pays the money he
owes.” Support Sys. Int'l v. Mack, 45 F.3d
185, 186 (7th Cir. 1995).
these reasons, the Court:
(1) DISMISSES this case as frivolous;
(2) DENIES the Motion for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis
[ECF No. 2];
(3) ORDERS the Plaintiff, Michael Sheneman, BOP # 11310-027,
to pay (and the facility having custody of him to
automatically remit) to the Clerk of Court 20 percent of the
money he receives for each calendar month during which he
receives $10.00 or more, until the $400.00 filing fee is paid
(4) DIRECTS the Clerk of Court to create a ledger for receipt
of these funds;
(5) DIRECTS the Clerk of Court to return, unfiled, any papers
filed in any case by or on behalf of Michael Sheneman (except
for a notice of appeal or unless filed in a criminal or
habeas corpus proceeding) until he has paid in full all
outstanding fees and sanctions in all civil actions in any
(6) DIRECTS the Clerk of Court to note on the docket of this
case any attempted filings in ...