United States District Court, D. Arizona
STEPHEN M. McNAMEE, Senior District Judge.
Plaintiff Dale Maisano, who is confined in the Arizona State Prison Complex-Florence in Florence, Arizona, has abused the legal process egregiously and often. He is subject to a February 20, 2014 Injunction Order that enjoins him from filing or lodging more than one in forma pauperis lawsuit per month. See Doc. 4 in Maisano v. Clark, 14-CV-0001-TUC-RCC (D. Ariz. 2014). As to the one lawsuit per month, the Injunction Order reiterates and supplements the terms of the 1992 Restraining Order in Maisano v. Lewis, CV 92-1026-PHX-SMM (MS), that enjoins him from filing any civil action in this or any other federal court without first obtaining leave of the court. Id.
Pursuant to the Injunction Order, to obtain leave to file, Plaintiff must file a motion for leave to file captioned as an "Application Pursuant to Court Order Seeking Leave to File." In the Application, Plaintiff must:
(1) file an affidavit certifying that the claim or claims presented are new and have never been raised and disposed of on the merits by any federal court;
(2) certify that, to the best of his knowledge, the claim or claims presented are not frivolous or taken in bad faith; and
(3) affix to the Application a copy of February 20, 2014 Injunction Order in 14-CV-0001-TUC-RCC, the January 29, 2014 Order to Show Cause in 14-CV-0001-TUC-RCC, the 1992 Restraining Order in Maisano v. Lewis, 92-CV-1026-PHX-SMM (MS); and a list of all cases previously filed involving similar or related causes of action.
"The failure to comply strictly with the terms of th[e Injunction] Order shall be sufficient ground to deny leave to file." Id.
On July 31, 2014, Plaintiff filed an Application Pursuant to Court Order Seeking Leave to File (Doc. 1) and lodged an Application to Proceed In Forma Pauperis and a civil rights Complaint. Although Plaintiff submitted the Application; the required affidavit and certification; the list of previously filed cases; a copy of the February 20, 2014 Injunction Order; and a copy of the 1992 Restraining Order, he did not file a copy of the January 29, 2014 Order to Show Cause. Plaintiff, therefore, has failed to comply strictly with the court-mandated pre-filing requirements. Accordingly, Plaintiff's Application will be denied and this action will be dismissed without prejudice.
IT IS ORDERED:
(1) Plaintiff's Application Pursuant to Court Order Seeking Leave to File (Doc. 1) is denied and this case is dismissed without prejudice. The Clerk of Court must enter judgment accordingly and close this case.
(2) The Clerk of Court must accept no further documents for filing in this case number, other than those ...