Na'im v. Ermatinger et al
ORDER Accepting 9 Findings, Conclusions & and Recommendation. The court certifies that any appeal of this action would not be taken in good faith. (Ordered by Judge Sam A Lindsay on 10/12/2017) (ran)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
JUDGE CINDY ERMATINGER;
JUDGE BOB CARROLL; and LT.
Civil Action No. 3:17-CV-1689-L
On August 16, 2017, United States Magistrate Judge Paul D. Stickney entered the Findings,
Conclusions and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge (“Report”), recommending
that the court dismiss with prejudice this action as frivolous pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1915A and
1915(e). No objections to the Report were filed.
After considering the pleadings, file, the record in this case, and Report, the court determines
that the findings and conclusions of the magistrate judge are correct, and accepts them as those of
the court. Accordingly, the court dismisses with prejudice this case as frivolous pursuant to 28
U.S.C. §§ 1915A and 1915(e).
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. 24(a)(3). In support of this certification, the court
accepts and incorporates by reference the Report. See Baugh v. Taylor, 117 F.3d 197, 202 and
n.21 (5th Cir. 1997). The court concludes 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.
Order – Page 1
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 clerk of the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth
Circuit. See Baugh, 117 F.3d at 202; Fed. R. App. P. 24(a)(5).
It is so ordered this 12th day of October, 2017.
Sam A. Lindsay
United States District Judge
Order – Page 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?