Jackson v. Mallott et al

Filing 27

ORDER signed by Judge Robert S. Lasnik denying 26 Motion. This matter comes before the Court on petitioners Motion for Certificate of Appealability 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a) which provides: An appeal may not be taken in forma pauperis if the trial court certifies in writing that it is not taken in good faith. An appeal that is frivolous or otherwise without merit is not taken in good faith. The Court is of the opinion that plaintiffs appeal is frivolous. He has not alleged any facts from wh ich one could conclude that the Court has subject matter jurisdiction over his claims. Thus, the Court certifies that the appeal is not taken in good faith and revokes plaintiff's in forma pauperis status. (CDA)cc 9th Circuit via ECF, plaintiff via US Mail

1
2
3
4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON
AT SEATTLE

5
6
7

MICHAEL E. JACKSON,

8

CASE NO. C17-1521RSL

Plaintiff,

9

v.

10

ORDER

11

ORVILLE B. MALLOTT, et al.,

12

Defendants.

13
14

This matter comes before the Court on petitioner’s “Motion for Certificate of

15

Appealability” 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a) which provides: “An appeal may not be taken in forma

16

pauperis if the trial court certifies in writing that it is not taken in good faith.” An appeal that is

17

frivolous or otherwise without merit is not taken in good faith.
The Court is of the opinion that plaintiff’s appeal is frivolous. He has not alleged any

18
19

facts from which one could conclude that the Court has subject matter jurisdiction over his

20

claims. Thus, the Court certifies that the appeal is not taken in good faith and revokes plaintiff’s

21

in forma pauperis status.

22

Dated this 1st day of February, 2018.

23
24

A

25

Robert S. Lasnik
United States District Judge

26
ORDER