Blaise v. Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) et al

Filing 16

ORDER denying 13 Motion for Leave to Appeal in forma pauperis; Adopting Report and Recommendations - re 14 Report and Recommendations. It is hereby CERTIFIED that Plaintiff's appeal is not taken in good faith. Signed by Judge Carlos E. Mendoza on 3/13/2017. (DJD)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA ORLANDO DIVISION DIE K. BLAISE, Plaintiff, v. Case No: 6:16-cv-1124-Orl-41TBS CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY (CIA), DEFENSE INTELLIGENCE AGENCY (DIA), NATIONAL SECURITY AGENCY (NSA), FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION (FBI), DRUG ENFORCEMENT AGENCY (DEA), RICHARD BURR and PAUL D. RYAN, Defendants. / ORDER THIS CAUSE is before the Court on Plaintiff’s Motion for Permission to Appeal In Forma Pauperis (Doc. 13). United States Magistrate Judge Thomas B. Smith submitted a Report and Recommendation (“R&R,” Doc. 14), in which he recommends that the motion be denied. Plaintiff filed an Objection (Doc. 15). After a de novo review of the record, the Court agrees with the analysis in the R&R. Plaintiff’s objections are without merit. A motion for leave to appeal in forma pauperis is properly filed first with the district court, not the appellate court. Additionally, Plaintiff’s Objection fails to address or correct the numerous deficiencies this Court has found in his Amended Complaint (Doc. 6) or assert a non-frivolous legal basis for appeal from this Court’s orders. Therefore, it is ORDERED and ADJUDGED as follows: Page 1 of 2 1. The Report and Recommendation (Doc. 14) is ADOPTED and CONFIRMED and made a part of this Order. 2. Plaintiff’s Motion for Permission to Appeal In Forma Pauperis (Doc. 13) is DENIED. 3. It is hereby CERTIFIED that Plaintiff’s appeal is not taken in good faith. DONE and ORDERED in Orlando, Florida on March 13, 2017. Copies furnished to: Unrepresented Party Page 2 of 2

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?