Cox v. Stephens et al

Filing 70

ORDER ADOPTING MEMORANDUM AND RECOMMENDATIONS TO DENY PLAINTIFF'S APPLICATION TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS ON APPEAL; re: denying 65 MOTION for Leave to Appeal in forma pauperis, 67 Memorandum and Recommendations, (Signed by Judge Nelva Gonzales Ramos) Parties notified.(lcayce, 2)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
CORPUS CHRISTI DIVISION
J L COX,
Plaintiff,
VS.
WILLIAM STEPHENS, et al,
Defendants.

§
§
§
§ CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:13-CV-00151
§
§
§
§

ORDER ADOPTING MEMORANDUM AND RECOMMENDATION
TO DENY PLAINTIFF’S APPLICATION
TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS ON APPEAL
Pending before the Court is Plaintiff’s Application to Proceed in Forma Pauperis
(IFP) with respect to his appeal (D.E. 65).

On September 9, 2015, United States

Magistrate Judge Jason B. Libby issued a Memorandum and Recommendation to Deny
Plaintiff’s Application to Proceed IFP on Appeal (D.E. 67). Plaintiff filed his Objections
(D.E. 68) on September 24, 2015.
Plaintiff simply suggests that he has demonstrated good cause or excusable neglect
regarding his application because his jailhouse lawyer was unable to timely prosecute his
appeal, including this application, because he was placed in solitary confinement for two
months, followed by an institutional lockdown of his unit for another month. Plaintiff
does not demonstrate why he did not or could not timely proceed on his own or with help
from another individual. Neither does Plaintiff attempt to show any exception to the
jurisdictional limitations of this Court and the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals related to

1/2

his untimely filings or correct his illegible trust account statement. He has not shown any
defect in the Magistrate Judge’s reasoning. His objections are OVERRULED.
Having reviewed the findings of fact, conclusions of law, and recommendations
set forth in the Magistrate Judge’s Memorandum and Recommendation, as well as
Plaintiff’s Objections, and all other relevant documents in the record, and having made a
de novo disposition of the portions of the Magistrate Judge’s Memorandum and
Recommendation

to

which

objections

were

specifically

directed,

the

Court

OVERRULES Plaintiff’s Objections and ADOPTS as its own the findings and
conclusions of the Magistrate Judge. Accordingly, Plaintiff’s Application to Proceed IFP
on Appeal (D.E. 65) is DENIED.
Plaintiff is advised that he has the right to appeal the denial of his application to
proceed IFP on appeal. Plaintiff may challenge the finding that his appeal was not
brought in good faith pursuant to Baugh v. Taylor, 117 F.3d 197 (5th Cir. 1997) by filing
a separate motion to proceed IFP on appeal with the Clerk of Court, U.S. Court of
Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, within 30 days of this Court’s Order.
ORDERED this 1st day of October, 2015.

___________________________________
NELVA GONZALES RAMOS
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

2/2