United States District Court, M.D. Florida, Ocala Division
ORDER DISMISSING CASE
WILLIAM F. JUNG UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
an inmate serving a sentence in the custody of Federal Bureau
of Prisons, initiated this case by filing a pro se civil
rights Complaint and a motion for leave to proceed as a
pauper. (Docs. 1 and 2). Plaintiff subsequently filed an
Amended Complaint (Doc. 4) and a Second Amended Complaint
(Doc 16). On October 2, 2019, the Court ordered Plaintiff to
show cause why this case should not be dismissed for abuse of
the judicial process because Plaintiff failed to truthfully
disclose all of his prior federal cases (at least four), as
required on the complaint form. (See Doc. 19).
Plaintiff has not filed a response.
executed the civil rights complaint form and certified
compliance with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 11. (Doc. 16
at 11). That form requires prisoners to disclose information
regarding previous lawsuits initiated by them. Specifically,
it required Plaintiff to disclose whether he had
“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, ” and to disclose all other
lawsuits he filed in state or federal court dealing with the
same facts involved in this action, and other lawsuits he
filed relating to the conditions of his imprisonment. It also
required Plaintiff to disclose information about each lawsuit
filed. Plaintiff listed the following case: Totten v.
Metcalf, et al., 5:19-cv-242 (M.D. Fla.).
inquiry concerning a prisoner's prior lawsuits is not a
matter of idle curiosity, nor is it an effort to raise
meaningless obstacles to a prisoner's access to the
courts. Rather, the existence of prior litigation initiated
by a prisoner is required in order for the Court to apply 28
U.S.C. § 1915(g) (the “three strikes rule”
applicable to prisoners proceeding in forma pauperis).
Additionally, it has been the Court's experience that a
significant number of prisoner filings raise claims or issues
that have already been decided adversely to the prisoner in
prior litigation. Identification of that prior litigation
frequently enables the Court to dispose of the successive
case without further expenditure of finite judicial
resources. In the absence of any basis for excusing a
plaintiff's lack of candor, failure to disclose and
truthfully describe previous lawsuits as clearly required on
the Court's prisoner civil rights complaint form warrants
dismissal of the complaint for abuse of the judicial process.
See Redmon v. Lake County Sheriff's Office, 414
Fed.Appx. 221, 225 (11th Cir. 2011).
Redmon, the Eleventh Circuit affirmed the dismissal
of a prisoner's civil rights complaint that did not
disclose a previous lawsuit. The plaintiff argued that he
“misunderstood” the form, but the Court held that
the district court had the discretion to conclude that the
plaintiff's explanation did not excuse his
misrepresentation because the complaint form “clearly
asked Plaintiff to disclose previously filed
lawsuits[.]” Id. The Court determined that
dismissal was an appropriate sanction:
Under 28 U.S.C. § 1915, “[a] finding that the
plaintiff engaged in bad faith litigiousness or manipulative
tactics warrants dismissal.” Attwood v.
Singletary, 105 F.3d 610, 613 (11th Cir. 1997). In
addition, a district court may impose sanctions if a party
knowingly files a pleading that contains false contentions.
Fed.R.Civ.P. 11(c). Although pro se pleadings are
held to a less stringent standard than pleadings drafted by
attorneys, a plaintiff's pro se status will not
excuse mistakes regarding procedural rules. McNeil v.
United States, 508 U.S. 106, 113 (1993).
Id. The failure to exercise candor in completing the
form impedes the Court in managing its caseload and merits
the sanction of dismissal. See id.; Jenkins v.
Hutcheson, 708 Fed.Appx. 647, 648 (11th Cir. 2018)
(finding that “the district court was entitled to
dismiss [plaintiff's] complaint based on his failure to
fully disclose his litigation history, ” and noting
that the district court reasoned that requiring prisoners to
disclose prior lawsuits is important to enable courts to
apply the “three strike rule” and dispose of
successive cases that relitigate old matters)
has failed to truthfully disclose his prior cases as required
by the plain language instructions of the form and has failed
to come forward with any persuasive reason to excuse his lack
of candor. The Court finds that Plaintiff's failure to
fully disclose his previous lawsuits, under penalty of
perjury, constitutes an abuse of the judicial process.
See Rivera v. Allin, 144 F.3d 719, 731 (11th Cir.
1998). An appropriate sanction for such abuse of the judicial
process is the dismissal of the Complaint. Id.
this case is hereby DISMISSED without prejudice. Such
dismissal counts as a “strike” for the purposes
of the three-strikes provision of the PLRA, 28 U.S.C. §
1915(g). The Clerk is directed to enter judgment dismissing
this case without prejudice, terminate any pending motions,
and close the file.
 Pursuant to 11th Cir. Rule
36-2, unpublished opinions are not binding precedent but may
be cited as ...