United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
F I L E D
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT April 20, 2004
Charles R. Fulbruge III
Clerk
No. 03-10610
Conference Calendar
ADOLPHUS PETTY,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
versus
JOSEPH DOMINGUEZ, Warden, NFN MADDOX, Lieutenant,
NFN REYNA, Sergeant, NFN ADUDDELL, Correctional Officer III,
NFN HULEN, Correctional Officer III, NFN SIMMONS, Sergeant,
Defendants-Appellees.
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of Texas
USDC No. 2:03-CV-19
--------------------
Before JOLLY, JONES, and SMITH, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Adolphus Petty appeals from the dismissal of his 42 U.S.C.
§ 1983 action as malicious because it was duplicative of his
earlier 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action. Petty’s motion for an
injunction to preserve medical records is DENIED. Petty contends
that the district court erred by dismissing his complaint
pursuant to Heck v. Humphrey, 512 U.S. 477 (1994), because he was
not attempting to invalidate the result of any disciplinary
*
Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined
that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent
except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.
R. 47.5.4.
No. 03-10610
-2-
hearing; that an interoffice memorandum attached to his appellate
brief demonstrates that he did invalidate the results of his
disciplinary hearing; and that the use of force against him
violated the Eighth Amendment.
Petty does not contend that the district court erred by
finding that his second 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action was duplicative
of his first 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action and dismissing the action
because it was malicious. Petty has failed to brief a
dispositive issue for appeal and has abandoned that issue. See
Brinkmann v. Dallas County Deputy Sheriff Abner, 813 F.2d 744,
748 (5th Cir. 1987).
Petty’s appeal is without arguable merit and is frivolous.
Howard v. King, 707 F.2d 215, 219-20 (5th Cir. 1983). This
court, on June 24, 2003, imposed the three-strikes sanction of 28
U.S.C. § 1915(g) on Petty. Petty v. Kelly, No. 02-41231, 3-4
(5th Cir. Jun. 24, 2003). We remind Petty that he may not
proceed in forma pauperis (IFP) in any civil action or appeal
filed while he is incarcerated or detained in any facility unless
he is under imminent danger of serious physical injury. See
28 U.S.C. § 1915(g).
APPEAL DISMISSED. See 5TH CIR. 42.2.