Peterson v. Center Pointe Energy Inc. et al

Filing 25

ORDER that Plaintiff's appeal is frivolous and not in good faith. Therefore, Plaintiff's in forma pauperis status is revoked. Signed by Chief Judge Gloria M. Navarro on 11/13/14. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF: cc 9th Circuit CofA - MMM)

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

2

DISTRICT OF NEVADA

3
JOHN C. PETERSON, an individual,
4
5
6

Plaintiff,
vs.
CENTERPOINT ENERGY INC., et al,

7
8

Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No. 2:13-cv-00766-GMN-GWF
ORDER

9

On October 20, 2014, the Court dismissed Plaintiff’s Second Amended Complaint (ECF

10

No. 15) with prejudice. (Order, ECF No. 19). On November 3, 2014, Plaintiff filed a Notice of

11

Appeal. (ECF No. 21). Then on November 12, 2014, the Ninth Circuit entered a Referral

12

Notice, referring this matter back to this Court for the purpose of determining whether the

13

appeal is frivolous and whether in forma pauperis status should be revoked. (Referral Notice,

14

Dkt. # 2); 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) (“An appeal may not be taken in forma pauperis if the trial

15

court certifies in writing that it is not taken in good faith.”).

16

In dismissing the Second Amended Complaint, the Court noted that this complaint—like

17

the previous two complaints—was incoherent and failed to contain any ascertainable claims.

18

(Order 3:4-4:15, ECF No. 19.) Accordingly, an appeal of the complaint’s dismissal is frivolous

19

and in bad faith. See Wilcox v. C.I.R., 848 F.2d 1007, 1009 (9th Cir. 1988) (“An appeal is

20

frivolous if the result is obvious, or the arguments of error are wholly without merit.”).

21

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff’s appeal is frivolous and not in good faith.

22

Therefore, Plaintiff’s in forma pauperis status is revoked.

23

DATED this 13th day of November, 2014.

24
25

___________________________________
Gloria M. Navarro, Chief Judge
United States District Court