Romero v. DHL Express (U.S.A.), Inc.
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER re: 54 MOTION for Leave to Appeal in forma pauperis. filed by Mauricio Baez Romero. Appellant Mauricio Baez Romero has moved for leave to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal. Accordingly, the appellant's appl ication to proceed in forma pauperis is denied, without prejudice to his ability to seek the same relief from the Court of Appeals. See Coppedge, 369 U.S. at 445. The Clerk is directed to close Docket No. 54. (As further set forth in this Order.) (Signed by Judge John G. Koeltl on 5/6/2017) (cf)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
MAURICIO BAEZ ROMERO,
15 Civ. 4844 (JGK)
- against DHL EXPRESS, INC.,
JOHN G. KOELTL, District Judge:
Appellant Mauricio Baez Romero has moved for leave to
proceed in forma pauperis on appeal.
“The decision of whether
to grant a request to proceed in forma pauperis is left to the
District Court’s discretion under 28 U.S.C. § 1915.
discretion is limited in that: An appeal may not be taken in
forma pauperis if the trial court certifies in writing that it
is not taken in good faith.”
Burda Media Inc. v. Blumenberg,
731 F. Supp. 2d 321, 322-23 (S.D.N.Y. 2010) (citations and
internal quotation marks omitted).
The “good faith” standard is
an objective one, and it is not met when a party seeks review of
a frivolous claim.
See Coppedge v. United States, 369 U.S. 438,
445 (1962); Linden v. Harper & Row Publishers, 490 F. Supp. 297,
300 (S.D.N.Y. 1980) (applying the objective good faith standard
in the civil context).
Here, the appellant has failed to
demonstrate that his claims have any merit.
appellant’s application to proceed in forma pauperis is denied,
without prejudice to his ability to seek the same relief from
the Court of Appeals.
See Coppedge, 369 U.S. at 445.
is directed to close Docket No. 54.
New York, New York
May 6, 2017
John G. Koeltl
United States District Judge
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?