Case: 12-10303 Document: 00511982641 Page: 1 Date Filed: 09/11/2012
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
FILED
September 11, 2012
No. 12-10303
Summary Calendar Lyle W. Cayce
Clerk
MICHAEL ANTHONY DAVIS,
Plaintiff-Appellant
v.
KAREN L. COLLINS; TERRI L. LASSITER; CHRISE WOLFE, Assistant United
States Attorney; MICHAEL J. WORLEY, Assistant United States Attorney,
Defendants-Appellees
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of Texas
USDC No. 4:12-CV-92
Before CLEMENT, ELROD, and GRAVES, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Michael Anthony Davis, federal prisoner # 33896-177, appeals the district
court’s dismissal of his pro se civil rights complaint. Davis has been barred from
proceeding in forma pauperis (IFP) under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g) because, on at
least three prior occasions while incarcerated, he brought a civil action or appeal
in a court of the United States that was dismissed as frivolous, malicious, or for
failure to state a claim upon which relief could be granted. See Davis v. United
*
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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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.
Case: 12-10303 Document: 00511982641 Page: 2 Date Filed: 09/11/2012
No. 12-10303
States, 4:11-CV-00064-Y (N.D. Tex. July 6, 2011) (unpublished) (dismissing civil
complaint as malicious); Davis v. Baker, 251 F. App’x 899 (5th Cir. 2007)
(unpublished) (dismissing appeal from dismissal of civil rights complaint as
frivolous and barring Davis from proceeding IFP in the future under § 1915(g));
Davis v. Baker, 4:06-CV-886 (N.D. Tex. Jan. 10, 2007) (unpublished) (dismissing
civil rights complaint as frivolous); Davis v. Baker, No. 4:07-CV-068-A (N.D. Tex.
May 3, 2007) (unpublished) (dismissing civil rights complaint as frivolous); and
Davis v. Inmate Trust Fund, No. 1:03-cv-00732-SS (W.D. Tex. Oct. 16, 2003)
(unpublished) (dismissing civil rights complaint for failure to state a claim upon
which relief may be granted). Further, Davis has not alleged that he is “under
imminent danger of serious physical injury.” § 1915(g).
Accordingly, Davis’s IFP status is decertified, and the appeal is dismissed.
Davis has 15 days from the date of this opinion to pay the full appellate filing fee
to the clerk of the district court, should he wish to reinstate his appeal.
IFP DECERTIFIED; APPEAL DISMISSED.
2