United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
F I L E D
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT December 20, 2006
Charles R. Fulbruge III
Clerk
No. 06-20456
Summary Calendar
EDWARD SANCHEZ HINOJOS,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
versus
BECKY A TIBBS, Librarian II,
Defendant-Appellee.
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Texas
USDC No. 4:05-CV-2219
--------------------
Before DeMOSS, STEWART, and PRADO, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Edward Sanchez Hinojos, Texas prisoner No. 1160674, appeals
the district court’s dismissal of his civil rights complaint
alleging a denial of his right of access to the courts. The
district court determined that the complaint was frivolous under
28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i) and that it failed to state a claim
for relief. Hinojos’s pleadings do not establish that the
defendant intentionally deprived him of access to the courts or
that he suffered any injury as the result of her actions. Lewis
v. Casey, 518 U.S. 343, 350-52 (1996); McDonald v. Steward, 132
*
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this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except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. 06-20456
-2-
F.3d 225, 230-31 (5th Cir. 1998). Hinojos’s argument that the
district court erred by dismissing his complaint prior to serving
the defendant is without merit. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i); 28 U.S.C.
§ 1915A.
Hinojos’s appeal is without arguable merit and is therefore
dismissed as frivolous. See Howard v. King, 707 F.2d 215, 219-20
(5th Cir. 1983); see 5TH CIR. R. 42.2.
The district court’s dismissal of Hinojos’s complaint and
this court’s dismissal of his appeal count as two strikes under
28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). Adepegba v. Hammons, 103 F.3d 383, 387 (5th
Cir. 1996). Hinojos is cautioned that if he accumulates three
strikes, he may no longer proceed in forma pauperis 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 § 1915(g).
APPEAL DISMISSED; SANCTION WARNING ISSUED.