Banks v. Valdez
Filing
11
Order Adopting 9 Findings and Recommendations on Case. The court certifies that any appeal of this action would not be taken in good faith. (Ordered by Judge Sidney A Fitzwater on 12/29/2015) (Judge Sidney A Fitzwater)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
DALLAS DIVISION
ODIS BANKS, # 1717887
Plaintiff,
v.
LUPE VALDEZ,
Defendant.
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
3:15-CV-3340-D
ORDER
After making an independent review of the pleadings, files, and records in this case, and
the findings, conclusions, and recommendation of the magistrate judge, the court concludes that
the findings and conclusions are correct. It is therefore ordered that the findings, conclusions,
and recommendation of the magistrate judge are adopted.
It is therefore ordered that this action is summarily dismissed with prejudice as frivolous
until. See 28 U.S.C. §§ 1915(e)(2)(B) and 1915A(b). This dismissal will count as a “strike” or
“prior occasion” within the meaning of 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g).
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 finding, the court
adopts and incorporates by reference the magistrate judge’s findings, conclusions, and
recommendation. See Baugh v. Taylor, 117 F.3d 197, 202 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, plaintiff 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).
SO ORDERED.
December 29, 2015.
_________________________________
SIDNEY A. FITZWATER
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
-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?