Bogosian et al v. Rhode Island Airport Corporation (T.F. Green Airport) et al
Filing
139
ORDER adopting 136 Report and Recommendations and denying 128 Motion for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis. So Ordered by Senior Judge Mary M. Lisi on 6/26/2017. A copy of this Memorandum and Order was forwarded to Plaintiffs via first-class mail. (Feeley, Susan)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF RHODE ISLAND
GREGG BOGOSIAN and THADOSHA
BOGOSIAN and A.B.,
a minor child, by and through her parents
and natural guardians, Gregg Bogosian and
Thadosha Bogosian,
Plaintiffs
v.
C.A. No. 14-080-ML
RHODE ISLAND AIRPORT CORPORATION
(T.F. GREEN AIRPORT); OFFICER STEPHEN E.
REIS; SERGEANT CHARLES E. HALL;
OFFICER JOHN KINGSTON; and OFFICER
JOHN DOE,
Defendants
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court on review of a Report and
Recommendation (“R&R”) issued by Magistrate Judge Sullivan on June
5, 2017 (ECF No. 136), in which she recommends that the Court deny
the motion of Gregg Bogosian (“Bogosian”) for leave to proceed in
forma pauperis (ECF No. 128). Bogosian filed his “Response and
Objections” to the R&R on June 20, 2017 (ECF No. 138). Although
Bogosian states therein that his IFP motion “is hereby withdrawn
under duress,” Pltf.’s Obj. at 7, he also strenuously disputes some
of the facts on which the Magistrate Judge’s recommendation is
based.
1
The Court reviews de novo those portions of the R&R to which
a timely objection has been made. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b). The
Court has thoroughly reviewed and considered the R&R, Bogosian’s
objection thereto, Bogosian’s motion for IFP (ECF No. 128) and the
Defendants’ response in opposition to Bogosian’s motion (ECF Nos.
129, 130). Having done so, the Court now adopts the R&R in its
entirety.
As rightly noted in the R&R, nine days after filing the
instant motion, Bogosian and his wife appealed from a judgment in
favor of the Defendants and arranged for payment of the $505 filing
fee. R&R at 1. Consequently, the case is now on appeal. Moreover,
the record reveals that the Plaintiffs are a married couple living
together; that Bogosian’s wife is gainfully employed; and that
Bogosian owns a car and worked as an Uber driver last year. Under
those
circumstances,
Bogosian
does
not
qualify
for
in
forma
pauperis status.
Accordingly, Bogosian’s motion for leave to proceed in forma
pauperis is DENIED.
SO ORDERED.
/s/ Mary M. Lisi
Senior United States District Judge
June 26, 2017
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?