The opinion of the court was delivered by: MCNICHOLS
ROBERT J. McNICHOLS, Chief Judge.
Between November 8th and December 1st of this year, Mr. Demos lodged seventeen § 1983 complaints and three habeas corpus petitions thereby bringing his career total in this district up to 184 separate actions in just over three years' time. Among the claims the court is now being asked to expend its resources on are such colorful and innovative contentions as the following:
-- Declaratory judgment that all current Washington State law is unconstitutional because no statutes enacted subsequent to the 1881 code have been ratified by Congress.
-- Award of damages because prison guards have refused to address plaintiff by his Islamic name.
-- Guards are misappropriating institutional property.
-- Prison employee handling food failed to wear gloves or proper headgear.
-- Writ of mandate should issue to require Congress to redraft language in the Declaration of Independence.
It appearing that plaintiff/petitioner lacks sufficient funds to prosecute these actions, it is hereby
ORDERED that the Clerk shall file each complaint and each petition under its own caption without payment of a filing fee.
It appearing that each and every complaint and petition is frivolous, malicious, repetitive, de minimis, wholly insubstantial, or insufficient to invest the court with subject matter jurisdiction, and that none is amenable to cure through amendment, it is hereby
So long as Mr. Demos confined his submissions to a leisurely pace of two or so per week, his contributions to prisoner-related judicature were tolerable, and indeed were welcomed by the staff as invigorating respites from an otherwise workaday schedule. Now, however, the stride has quickened. Unlike vitamins and apples, the effect of digesting Demos' pleadings on a schedule of one-a-day, every-day, is somewhat less than salubrious. "No one, rich or poor, is entitled to abuse the judicial process." Hardwick v. Brinson, 523 F.2d 798, 800 (5th Cir.1975). If that axiom is to have any meaning at all, then it is high time to develop some means of bringing Demos' excesses in this direction under some semblance of control.
Among the intriguing legal problems posited in the past are the following, culled from a memorandum entered April 29, 1981: