JOHN S. BRYANT, Magistrate Judge.
The Defendants have jointly filed their motion for judgment on the pleadings (Docket Entry No. 196). As grounds, Defendants argue that Plaintiff Turner violated the "three strike rule" contained in 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g) and that Plaintiff therefore should not be permitted to maintain this action without paying the required filing fee. Plaintiff Turner has filed a response in opposition (Docket Entry No. 226).
For the reasons stated below, the undersigned Magistrate Judge finds that Defendants' motion should be granted.
Plaintiff Turner, a prisoner currently proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, has filed his civil rights complaint alleging that Defendants are guilty of religious and racial discrimination by refusing to allow Plaintiff to pray at the times and in the manner prescribed by his religion (Muslim) and by failing to serve him a proper Halal diet required by his faith. Plaintiff also alleges that Defendants have retaliated against him for filing grievances by giving him excessive disciplinary write-ups. Finally, Plaintiff Turner claims that Defendants have failed to provide an adequate law library while he was in custody of the Davidson County Sheriff's office.
Title 28, § 1915(g), of the United States Code provides as follows:
This provision has come to be called the "three strike rule."
Defendants state that before Plaintiff Turner filed the complaint in this case on September 6, 2012, he had already had more than three prior cases dismissed on grounds that would constitute a "strike" under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). Therefore, according to Defendants, Plaintiff Turner should be allowed to maintain this action only after paying the required filing fee.
The five prior cases relied upon by Defendants are the following:
Upon a review of the records of the foregoing cases, the undersigned has determined that the Turner v. Dotson case involved a petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. The Sixth Circuit has held that the fee requirements of 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g) do not apply to habeas corpus petitions. Kincade v. Sparkman, 117 F.3d 949 (6th Cir. 1997). However, it does appear from the record that the other four cases listed by Defendants were dismissed on grounds that would implicate the "three strike rule." Accordingly, the undersigned finds that Plaintiff Turner should not be allowed to proceed in forma pauperis in this action.
For the reasons stated above, the undersigned Magistrate Judge finds that Defendants' motion for judgment on the pleadings should be granted and that Plaintiff Turner should be required to pay the required filing fee as a condition for prosecuting this action.
For the reasons stated above, the undersigned recommends (1) that Defendants' motion for judgment on the pleadings be granted, (2) that the prior order (Docket Entry No. 6) granting Plaintiff leave to proceed in forma pauperis be vacated, and (3) that Plaintiff Turner be given a reasonable period within which to pay the required filing fee as a condition for his continued prosecution of this action.
Under Rule 72(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, any party has