Macedon v. Department of Corrections et al

Filing 4

ORDER OF DISMISSAL: The Clerk of Court is directed to mail a copy of this order to Plaintiff and note service on the docket. The Court certifies under 28 U.S.C. 1915(a)(3) that any appeal from this order would not be taken in good faith, and therefore IFP status is denied for the purpose of an appeal. Cf. Coppedge v. United States, 369 U.S. 438, 444-45 (1962) (holding that an appellant demonstrates good faith when he seeks review of a nonfrivolous issue). SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Colleen McMahon on 1/5/21) (rdz) Transmission to Docket Assistant Clerk for processing.

Download PDF
Case 1:20-cv-10123-CM Document 4 Filed 01/05/21 Page 1 of 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK GEORGE MACEDON, Plaintiff, 20-CV-10123 (CM) -againstORDER OF DISMISSAL DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, ET AL., Defendants. COLLEEN McMAHON, Chief United States District Judge: By order dated December 3, 2020, the Court directed Plaintiff, within thirty days, to submit a completed request to proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP application”) and prisoner authorization or pay the $400.00 in fees required to file a civil action in this Court. That order specified that failure to comply would result in dismissal of the complaint. Plaintiff has not paid the fees or filed an IFP application and prisoner authorization. Accordingly, the complaint is dismissed without prejudice. See 28 U.S.C. §§ 1914, 1915. The Clerk of Court is directed to mail a copy of this order to Plaintiff and note service on the docket. The Court certifies under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal from this order would not be taken in good faith, and therefore IFP status is denied for the purpose of an appeal. Cf. Coppedge v. United States, 369 U.S. 438, 444-45 (1962) (holding that an appellant demonstrates good faith when he seeks review of a nonfrivolous issue). SO ORDERED. Dated: January 5, 2021 New York, New York COLLEEN McMAHON Chief 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?