Mehmood v. Andris et al

Filing 19

ORDER signed by Judge John A. Mendez on 8/19/15. IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff is, nunc pro tunc, granted in forma pauperis status in the district court. Plaintiff's 17 Motion to Proceed IFP on appeal is DENIED. (Meuleman, A)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

YASIR MEHMOOD,

12

No. 2:15-cv-0043 JAM AC P

Plaintiff,

13

v.

14

ANDRIS, et al.,

15

ORDER

Defendants.

16
Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, brought a qui tam action under the federal

17
18

False Claims Act. Judgment was entered in this action on June 23, 2015. ECF No. 12. On June

19

30, 2015, plaintiff filed a notice of appeal.1 ECF No. 15. He then proceeded to file a motion for

20

leave to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal. ECF No. 17. Plaintiff did not seek or obtain in

21

forma pauperis status prior to judgment in this case.
The Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure provide as follows:

22
23

[A] party who has been permitted to proceed in an action in the
district court in forma pauperis . . . may proceed on appeal in forma
pauperis without further authorization unless . . . the district court
shall certify that the appeal is not taken in good faith or shall find
that the party is otherwise not entitled so to proceed . . . .

24
25
26
27
28

Fed. R. App. P. 24(a). After review of plaintiff’s motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis,
1

Since plaintiff is proceeding pro se, he is afforded the benefit of the prison mailbox rule. See
Houston v. Lack, 487 U.S. 266, 276 (1988).
1

1

the court finds, nunc pro tunc, that plaintiff is entitled to in forma pauperis status in the district

2

court. However, after review of the record herein, the court finds that plaintiff’s appeal is not

3

taken in good faith. Accordingly, plaintiff’s motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis on

4

appeal is denied.

5

In accordance with the above, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

6

1. Plaintiff is, nunc pro tunc, granted in forma pauperis status in the district court.

7

2. Plaintiff’s motion to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal (ECF No. 17) is denied. See

8

Fed. R. App. P. 24(a).

9

DATED: August 19, 2015

10

/s/ John A. Mendez____________________

11

John A. Mendez, U. S. District Court Judge

12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2