Faison v. Outlaw Association and Hearts Behind Bars Association
Filing
11
ORDER REVOKING IN FORMA PAUPERIS STATUS. Signed by Judge Richard Seeborg on 3/21/12. (Attachments: # 1 Appendix Certificate of Service)(cl, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 3/21/2012)
1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
2
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
3
SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION
4
5
MATTHEW LEO LEVI FAISON,
6
7
8
No. C 11-5095 RS (PR)
Plaintiff,
ORDER REVOKING IN FORMA
PAUPERIS STATUS
v.
OUTLAW ASSOCIATION, and
HEARTS AND BARS ASSOCIATION,
10
United States District Court
For the Northern District of California
9
Defendants.
/
11
12
This closed federal civil rights action, which is currently on appeal, was filed by a pro
13
se state prisoner. The Court of Appeals has referred the matter to this Court for a
14
determination whether plaintiff’s in forma pauperis (“IFP”) status should continue for this
15
appeal. This Court determines that it should not. There are no valid grounds on which an
16
appeal can be based. Consequently, the Court certifies that any appeal taken from the order
17
of dismissal and judgment of this action will not be taken in good faith and is therefore
18
frivolous. Fed. R. App. P. (“FRAP”) 24(a)(3)(A); Ellis v. United States, 356 U.S. 674, 674–
19
75 (1958); Hooker v. American Airlines, 302 F.3d 1091, 1092 (9th Cir. 2002). Accordingly,
20
plaintiff’s IFP status is hereby REVOKED. The Clerk shall forthwith notify plaintiff and the
21
Court of Appeals of this order. See FRAP 24(a)(4). Plaintiff may file a motion for leave to
22
proceed IFP on appeal in the Court of Appeals within thirty days after service of notice of
23
this order. See FRAP 24(a)(5). Any such motion “must include a copy of the affidavit filed
24
in the district court and the district court’s statement of reasons for its action.” Id.
25
26
27
IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATED: March 21, 2012
RICHARD SEEBORG
United States District Judge
28
No. C 11-5095 RS (PR)
ORDER REVOKING IFP STATUS
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?