Bonilla v. Mendocino County Superior Court ( 2022 )

1 2 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 3 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 4 5 STEVEN WAYNE BONILLA, Case Nos. 22-cv-7498-PJH Plaintiff, 22-cv-7516-PJH 6 22-cv-7517-PJH v. 7 22-cv-7546-PJH 8 22-cv-7547-PJH CONTRA COSTA COUNTY SUPERIOR 22-cv-7548-PJH 9 COURT et. al., 22-cv-7549-PJH Defendants. 10 22-cv-7711-PJH 11 22-cv-7712-PJH 22-cv-8982-PJH 12 22-cv-8983-PJH 13 22-cv-8984-PJH 14 22-cv-9055-PJH 22-cv-9100-PJH 15 16 17 ORDER DISMISSING MULTIPLE CASES WITH PREJUDICE 18 19 Plaintiff, a state prisoner, has filed multiple pro se civil rights complaints under 42 20 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff is a condemned prisoner who also has a pending federal habeas 21 petition in this court with appointed counsel. See Bonilla v. Ayers, Case No. 08-0471 22 YGR. Plaintiff is also represented by counsel in state court habeas proceedings. See In 23 re Bonilla, Case No. 20-2986 PJH, Docket No. 1 at 7. 24 Plaintiff presents nearly identical claims in these actions. He names as 25 defendants various state superior courts and state judges. He seeks relief regarding his 26 underlying conviction or how his other cases were handled by the state and federal 27 courts. 1 To the extent that plaintiff seeks to proceed in forma pauperis (IFP) in these cases, 2 he has been disqualified from proceeding IFP under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g) unless he is 3 “under imminent danger of serious physical injury” at the time he filed his complaint. 28 4 U.S.C. 1915(g); In re Steven Bonilla, Case No. 11-3180 CW; Bonilla v. Dawson, Case 5 No. 13-0951 CW. 6 The allegations in these complaints do not show that plaintiff was in imminent 7 danger at the time of filing. Therefore, he may not proceed IFP. Moreover, even if an 8 IFP application were granted, his lawsuits would be barred under Heck v. Humphrey, 512 9 U.S. 477, 486-87 (1994), Younger v. Harris, 401 U.S. 37, 43-54 (1971), Demos v. U.S. 10 District Court, 925 F.2d 1160, 1161-62 (9th Cir. 1991) or Mullis v. U.S. Bankruptcy Court, 11 828 F.2d 1385, 1393 (9th Cir. 1987). Accordingly, the cases are dismissed with 12 prejudice. 13 The clerk shall terminate all pending motions and close these cases. The clerk 14 shall return, without filing, any further documents plaintiff submits in these closed cases. 15 IT IS SO ORDERED. 16 Dated: December 27, 2022 17 18 /s/ Phyllis J. Hamilton PHYLLIS J. HAMILTON 19 United States District Judge 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27