Dunning v. Vastbinder et al

Filing 15

ORDER DIRECTING ENTRY OF JUDGMENT, CERTIFYING AN APPEAL WOULD NOT BE TAKEN IN GOOD FAITH AND DENYING LEAVE TO APPEAL IN FORMA PAUPERIS. Signed by Judge James D. Todd on 6/1/16. (Todd, James)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE
EASTERN DIVISION
CHARLES DUNNING,
Plaintiff,
VS.
JERRY VASTBINDER, ET AL.,
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

No. 15-1058-JDT-egb

ORDER DIRECTING ENTRY OF JUDGMENT,
CERTIFYING AN APPEAL WOULD NOT BE TAKEN IN GOOD FAITH
AND DENYING LEAVE TO APPEAL IN FORMA PAUPERIS

On March 23, 2015, Plaintiff Charles Dunning, who was, at the time, incarcerated at the
Weakley County Jail in Dresden, Tennessee, filed a pro se complaint pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983
and a motion to proceed in forma pauperis. (ECF Nos. 1 & 2.) After Plaintiff filed all of the
necessary documents, the Court issued an order on April 17, 2015, granting leave to proceed in
forma pauperis and assessing the civil filing fee pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1915(a)-(b). (ECF No.
7.) The order also directed Plaintiff to notify the Court immediately, in writing, of any change of
address and warned that failure to do so could result in dismissal of the action without further notice.
(Id. at 3.)
Plaintiff subsequently notified the Court of his transfer to the Bledsoe County Correctional
Complex in Pikeville, Tennessee (ECF No. 9) and then to the Northwest Correctional Complex
(“NWCX”) in Tiptonville, Tennessee (ECF No. 10). On March 23, 2016, the Court issued an order

ruling on various pending motions (ECF No. 12), but the copy of the order that was sent to Plaintiff
at the NWCX was returned undeliverable on April 25, 2016 (ECF No. 14).
On April 14, 2016, the Court issued an order dismissing the complaint sua sponte pursuant
to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1915(e)(2)(B) and 1915A(b) but granting leave to file an amended complaint within
thirty days. (ECF No. 13.) Plaintiff was warned that failure to file an amendment would result in
the entry of judgment and assessment of a “strike” pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1915(g). (Id. at 12.) That
order has not been returned undeliverable. However, Plaintiff has not filed an amended complaint,
and the time within which to do so has expired. Therefore, judgment will be entered in accordance
with the April 14, 2016, order of dismissal.
It is CERTIFIED, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) and Federal Rule of Appellate
Procedure 24(a), that an appeal would not be taken in good faith. Leave to appeal in forma pauperis
is DENIED.
For analysis under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g) of future filings, if any, by Plaintiff, this is the first
dismissal of one of his cases as frivolous or for failure to state a claim. This “strike” shall take effect
when judgment is entered. See Coleman v. Tollefson, 135 S. Ct. 1759, 1763-64 (2015).
The Clerk is directed to prepare a judgment.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
s/ James D. Todd
JAMES D. TODD
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

2