The opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
CASE NO.: 0:25-cv-61723-GAYLES
STEPHEN BOURGEOIS,1
a/k/a Steven Bourgeoisz,
Plaintiff,
v.
DEPUTY PIRREY,
Defendant.
________________________/
ORDER DISMISSING COMPLAINT UNDER 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g)
THIS CAUSE is before the Court on Plaintiff Stephen Bourgeois’ pro se civil rights
Complaint under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. [ECF No. 1]. Plaintiff, a pretrial detainee, has not paid the
filing fee and has filed a motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP”) [ECF No. 3]. As
explained below, Plaintiff may not initiate a civil action in federal court without prepaying the
entire filing fee because he has three “strikes” under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). For the following
reasons, his Complaint is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.
“To commence a civil lawsuit in federal district court, the general rule is that initiating
parties must prepay a filing fee.” Rivera v. Allin, 144 F.3d 719, 722 (11th Cir. 1998) (citing 28
U.S.C. § 1914(a)), overruled on other grounds by Jones v. Bock, 549 U.S. 199 (2007). A person
who is “unable to pay such fees or give security therefor” can avoid prepaying the filing fee by
1 Plaintiff has utilized different spellings of his name in his numerous filings in this District. In this case, he
spells it “Steven Bourgeoisz.” [ECF No. 1 at 1]. However, Plaintiff’s name in the Florida Department of
Corrections’ database is spelled “Stephen Bourgeois,” so the Court uses that spelling here. See Fla. Dep’t
of Corr., Corrections Offender Network, https://pubapps.fdc.myflorida.com/OffenderSearch/Search.aspx
(search DC Number: I46405).
filing a motion for leave to proceed IFP. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a). The statute, however, contains a
major exception to this rule:
In no event shall a prisoner bring a civil action or appeal a judgment in a
civil action or proceeding under this section if the prisoner has, on 3 or
more prior occasions, while incarcerated or detained in any facility,
brought an action or appeal in a court of the United States that was
dismissed on the grounds that it is frivolous, malicious, or fails to state a
claim upon which relief may be granted, unless the prisoner is under
imminent danger of serious physical injury.
Id. § 1915(g). The purpose of this provision, known as the “three-strikes rule,” is “to curtail abusive
prisoner litigation.” Dupree v. Palmer, 284 F.3d 1234, 1236 (11th Cir. 2002). After a prisoner has
filed three or more meritless actions or appeals, a district court is authorized to dismiss the
complaint without prejudice under the three-strikes rule if the prisoner fails to pay the filing fee
“at the time he initiates suit.” Id. (emphasis in original).
Plaintiff did not pay the filing fee when he initiated this suit. Therefore, his Complaint must
be dismissed without prejudice under the three-strikes rule. A review of this District’s Case
Management/Electronic Case Files (“CM/ECF”) database reveals that Plaintiff is a prolific filer
who has filed over a dozen other civil actions in this District while incarcerated, more than three
of which were dismissed as frivolous, malicious, or for failure to state a claim for relief. Plaintiff
was recently determined to have three strikes by this Court. See Bourgeois v. Medical Staff, No.
25-cv-61625-DPG, ECF No. 5 (S.D. Fla. Aug. 13, 2025) (dismissing case under the three-strikes
rule and noting that another judge in this District found that “Plaintiff has previously filed over
fifteen civil cases” in this District while incarcerated).2
2 Federal Rule of Evidence 201 permits the Court to take judicial notice of other courts’ orders “for the
limited purpose of recognizing the ‘judicial act’ that the order represents. . . .” United States v. Jones, 29
F.3d 1549, 1553 (11th Cir. 1994) (citation omitted). The Court has confirmed that these cases were filed by
the same Stephen Bourgeois who filed this case. In each case, Plaintiff used either his current Broward
County Jail Number, 572501411, or a previous Broward County Jail Number, 191400123, and he listed the
same date of birth.
In addition, Plaintiff’s Complaint does not meet the “imminent danger of serious physical
injury” exception to the three-strikes rule. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). To qualify under the imminent
danger exception, the Eleventh Circuit requires a pleading of “specific allegations of present
imminent danger that may result in serious physical harm.” Brown v. Johnson, 387 F.3d 1344,
1349 (11th Cir. 2004). “[A] prisoner’s allegation that he faced imminent danger sometime in the
past is an insufficient basis to allow him to proceed [IFP] pursuant to the imminent danger
exception to the statute.” Medberry v. Butler, 185 F.3d 1189, 1193 (11th Cir. 1999). “To avail
himself of the imminent danger exception, a three-strike prisoner must show that he was in
imminent danger of serious physical injury or was in jeopardy of an ongoing danger at the time he
filed his complaint.” Smith v. Dewberry, 741 F. App’x 683, 686 (11th Cir. 2018) (citing Medberry,
185 F.3d at 1193).
Plaintiff’s Complaint alleges that Defendant Deputy Pirrey is “threatening [ ] to hurt me
and deny me . . . my tray of food.” [ECF No. 1 at 2]. The Complaint contains no details about these
alleged threats nor any allegations of imminent serious physical injury. See Brown, 387 F.3d at
1350 (holding that a “general assertion is insufficient to invoke the exception to § 1915(g) absent
specific fact allegations of ongoing serious physical injury, or of a pattern of misconduct
evidencing the likelihood of imminent serious physical injury” (quoting Martin v. Shelton, 319
F.3d 1048, 1050 (8th Cir. 2003))). Therefore, Plaintiff has not presented “specific allegations of
present imminent danger that may result in serious physical harm.” Id. at 1349.
Accordingly, it is ORDERED AND ADJUDGED as follows:
1. Plaintiff’s Complaint [ECF No. 1] is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE under
the three-strikes rule of § 1915(g).
2. This case is CLOSED, and all pending motions are DENIED AS MOOT.
DONE AND ORDERED in Chambers at Miami, Florida, this 27th day of August, 2025.
DARRIN P. GAYLES
UNITED STATES DISTRJIET JUDGE
ce: Stephen Bourgeois, pro se
572501411
Joseph V. Conte Facility
Inmate Mail/Parcels
P.O. Box 407016
Fort Lauderdale, FL 33340
-4-