Malone v. White
Filing
11
ORDER ACCEPTING 9 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE. It is therefore ORDERED that the petition for writ of mandamus is summarily DISMISSED with prejudice as frivolous and petitioner is WARNED that sanctions may be im posed if he persists in filing frivolous or baseless petitions for writ of mandamus or for nunc pro tunc relief. The court prospectively CERTIFIES that any appeal of this action would not be taken in good faith. (Ordered by Senior Judge A. Joe Fish on 1/7/2014) (ctf)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
DALLAS DIVISION
MARVIN L. MALONE, # 411853,
Petitioner,
VS.
JUDGE EARNEST WHITE,
Respondent.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
CIVIL ACTION NO.
3:13-CV-4636-G (BK)
ORDER ACCEPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION
OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
The United States Magistrate Judge made findings, conclusions, and a
recommendation in this case. Petitioner filed objections, and the district court has
made a de novo review of those portions of the proposed findings and recommendation
to which objection was made. The objections are overruled, and the court ACCEPTS
the findings, conclusions, and recommendation of the United States Magistrate
Judge.
It is therefore ORDERED that the petition for writ of mandamus is summarily
DISMISSED with prejudice as frivolous and petitioner is WARNED that sanctions
may be imposed if he persists in filing frivolous or baseless petitions for writ of
mandamus or for nunc pro tunc relief.
The court prospectively CERTIFIES that any appeal of this action would not
be taken in good faith. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3); FED. R. APP. P. 24(a)(3). In
support of this certification, the court adopts and incorporates by reference the
magistrate judge’s findings, conclusions, and recommendation. See Baugh v. Taylor,
117 F.3d 197, 202 and n.21 (5th Cir. 1997). Based on the findings and
recommendation, the court finds that any appeal of this action would present no legal
point of arguable merit and would, therefore, be frivolous. Howard v. King, 707 F.2d
215, 220 (5th Cir. 1983).* In the event of an appeal, petitioner may challenge this
certification by filing a separate motion to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal with
the Clerk of the Court, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit. See Baugh, 117
F.3d at 202; FED. R. APP. P. 24(a)(5).
January 7, 2014.
___________________________________
A. JOE FISH
Senior United States District Judge
Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 4(a) governs the time to appeal an order.
A timely notice of appeal must be filed even if the district court certifies an appeal as
not taken in good faith.
*
-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?