Gregory C. Bontemps v. D. HICKS, Sgt.

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
GREGORY C. BONTEMPS,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
D. HICKS, Sgt.,
Defendant-Appellee.
No. 17-15583
D.C. No. 1:16-cv-01854-EPG
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of California
Erica P. Grosjean, Magistrate Judge, Presiding
Submitted February 13, 2018**
Before: LEAVY, FERNANDEZ, and MURGUIA, Circuit Judges.
California state prisoner Gregory C. Bontemps appeals pro se from the
magistrate judge’s order dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging that he
was subjected to an inappropriate unclothed body search. We have jurisdiction
under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo whether the magistrate judge validly
* 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).
FILED
FEB 22 2018
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

-- 1 of 2 --

2 17-15583
entered judgment on behalf of the district court. Allen v. Meyer, 755 F.3d 866,
867-68 (9th Cir. 2014). We vacate and remand.
Bontemps consented to proceed before the magistrate judge. See 28 U.S.C.
§ 636(c). The magistrate judge then denied in forma pauperis status on the basis
that Bontemps had accrued three strikes and dismissed Bontemps’ action for
failure to pay the filing fee before the named defendants had been served. See 28
U.S.C. § 1915(g) (prisoner cannot bring a civil action if he has accrued three
strikes). Because all parties, including unserved defendants, must consent to
proceed before the magistrate judge for jurisdiction to vest, Williams v. King, 875
F.3d 500, 503-04 (9th Cir. 2017), we vacate the magistrate judge’s order and
remand for further proceedings.
Bontemps’ second request to proceed in forma pauperis (Docket Entry No.
10) is denied as unnecessary.
VACATED and REMANDED.

-- 2 of 2 --