United States District Court, S.D. Texas, Houston Division
MEMORANDUM ON DISMISSAL
H. BENNETT, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE.
Matthew Davis, a Texas Department of Criminal Justice inmate,
sued in August 2019, alleging civil rights violations
resulting from a denial of adequate medical care. Davis has
neither paid the $350.00 filing fee nor sought leave to
proceed as a pauper. From his litigation history, the Court
presumes that he seeks leave to proceed in forma pauperis.
Davis, proceeding pro se, sues Andrea Cox, patient care
assistant; Issacc Kwanteng, Director of University of Texas
Medical Branch; Tiffani Mate, nursing/patient care assistant;
and Tanya Lawson, Senior Practice Manager.
threshold issue is whether Davis's claims should be
dismissed as barred by the three-strikes provision of 28
U.S.C. § 1915(g). The Court concludes that Davis's
claims are barred and should be dismissed for the reasons
asserts that on an unspecified date in July and on August 9,
2019, Nurse Cox refused to administer a Genvoya tablet for
treatment of HIV. Davis asserts that the nurses on the
McConnell Unit have denied his medications because he is
black and a Muslim. Davis seeks $150, 000.00 in compensatory
prisoner is not allowed to bring a civil action in forma
pauperis in federal court if, while incarcerated, three or
more of his civil actions or appeals were dismissed as
frivolous or malicious or for failure to state a claim upon
which relief may be granted, unless he is in imminent danger
of serious physical injury. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g).
litigation history reveals that he has previously submitted
abusive and scurrilous filings in federal court. Prior to
filing this action, he had at least three suits dismissed as
frivolous. Davis v. Hendry, 4:12-CV-3640 (dismissed
as frivolous on April 22, 2013)(S.D. Tex.); Davis v.
Sergeant/Lieutenant of Classification, 4:13-CV-0098
(dismissed for failure to state a claim on January 17,
2013)(S.D. Tex.); and Davis v. Rowell, 4:12-CV-3601
(dismissed for failure to state a claim on January 11,
construed, Davis alleges that he is in imminent danger of
serious physical injury due to the denial of adequate medical
care for HIV. Davis claims that the defendants are negligent
in the administration of his medications. His allegations as
a whole reflect his disagreement with the medical care being
afforded him. Such disagreement, however, is insufficient to
show that he is in imminent danger for purposes of §
1915(g). Davis v. Gregory, 735 F.App'x 158, 159
(5th Cir. 2018). See also Edmondv. Tex. Dep't of
Corrs., No. 97-10819, 161 F.3d 8, 1998 WL 723877, at *3
(5th Cir. Oct. 7, 1998) (per curiam) (Allegations about the
quality of medical care are insufficient to meet the
threshold requirement of imminent danger of physical injury).
present case, Davis has not alleged, nor does his complaint
demonstrate, that he is in imminent danger ofserious physical
injury. Accordingly, Davis is barred under 28 U.S.C. §
1915(g) from proceeding in forma pauperis in this action.
Constructive Motion to Proceed as a Pauper, (Docket Entry No.
1), is DENIED. The complaint filed by Terry Matthew Davis,
(TDCJ-CID #02188800), is DISMISSED under 28 U.S.C. §
1915(g). Davis's Motion for Disposition of
Indictments, (Docket Entry No. 3), is DENIED as moot. All
pending motions are DENIED. Davis is warned that continued
frivolous filings may result in the imposition of sanctions.
Clerk will provide a copy of this order by regular mail,
facsimile transmission, or e-mail to:
TDCJ - Office of the General Counsel, Capitol Station, P.O.
Box 13084, ...