NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS AUG 12 2020
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
LANCE REBERGER, No. 19-15155
Plaintiff-Appellant, D.C. No. 3:17-cv-00552-RCJ-WGC
v.
MEMORANDUM*
JAMES DZURENDA; et al.,
Defendants-Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Nevada
Robert Clive Jones, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted August 5, 2020**
Before: SCHROEDER, HAWKINS, and LEE, Circuit Judges.
Nevada state prisoner Lance Reberger appeals pro se from the district
court’s judgment dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action for failure to pay the
filing fee after denying Reberger’s application to proceed in forma pauperis
(“IFP”). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo.
*
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
**
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
Andrews v. Cervantes, 493 F.3d 1047, 1052 (9th Cir. 2007). We reverse and
remand.
The district court denied Reberger’s application to proceed IFP on the basis
that Reberger has three prior strikes. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). However, Reberger
alleged in the complaint that he was under imminent danger of serious physical
harm because his prolonged isolation in administrative segregation is causing him
physical injuries, he is unable to access his HIV medication as prescribed, and his
water is contaminated with chemicals and is undrinkable. These allegations are
sufficient to satisfy the “imminent danger” exception. See Andrews, 493 F.3d at
1055 (an exception to the three-strikes rule exists where “the complaint makes a
plausible allegation that the prisoner faced ‘imminent danger of serious physical
injury’ at the time of filing.”). We reverse the judgment and remand for further
proceedings.
REVERSED and REMANDED.
2 19-15155