Carter v. O' Carrol et al

Filing 17

ORDER denying Motions for leave to appeal in forma pauperis ( 15 in case no. 3:12-cv-740 and 13 in case no. 3:12-cv-741); denying motions to suggest order to be revisited should be certified ( 16 in case no. 3:12-cv-740 and 14 in case no. 3:12-cv-741). Signed by Judge Timothy J. Corrigan on 10/10/2012.(SRW)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
JACKSONVILLE DIVISION
RONALD CARTER,
Plaintiff,
vs.

Case No. 3:12-cv-740-J-32JRK

PATRICK P. O’CARROLL, JR., et al.,
Defendants.
___________________________________
RONALD CARTER,
Plaintiff,
vs.

Case No. 3:12-cv-741-J-32TEM

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Defendant.

ORDER
This case is before the Court on plaintiff’s Motions for Leave to Appeal in forma
pauperis (Doc. 15 in Case No. 3:12-cv-740 and Doc. 13 in Case No. 3:12-cv-741). Although
plaintiff likely meets the financial requirements for proceeding in forma pauperis, plaintiff’s
motions are due to be denied. The Court’s Order dismissing these cases was based on a
finding that plaintiff’s claims were so unrealistic as to be frivolous to the extent that the Court
did not have subject matter jurisdiction. Although plaintiff has filed a “Motion to Suggest
Order to be Revisited Should be Certified by the Court” (Doc. 16 in Case No. 3:12-cv-740
and Doc. 14 in Case No. 3:12-cv-741), in which he explains why he believes the Court was
mistaken, nothing in those papers persuades the Court that he is correct. Accordingly, the

Court finds any grounds for his appeal are frivolous within the meaning of 28 U.S.C. §
1915(e)(2)(B)(I). See Sun v. Forrester, 939 F.2d 924 (11th Cir. 1991) (defining a frivolous
appeal in this Circuit as one which is “without arguable merit” either factually or legally).
Plaintiff’s Motions for Leave to Appeal in forma pauperis and the Motions to Suggest Order
to be Revisited Should be Certified by the Court are denied.
DONE AND ORDERED at Jacksonville, Florida this 10th day of October, 2012.

s.
Copies:

Clerk of Court, Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals
pro se plaintiff

2