Opinion
CIVIL ACTION NO. 5:12-CV-127 (MTT)
06-19-2012
ROBERTO BAEZ, Plaintiff, v. SERGEANT JAMES, et al, Defendants.
ORDER
This matter is before the Court on the Plaintiff's two Amended Motions for Leave to Appeal In Forma Pauperis. (Docs. 15 and 16). For the following reasons, the Motions are DENIED.
The Plaintiff's Complaint was dismissed, and his Motion to Proceed In Forma Pauperis was denied because he violated the Prison Litigation Reform Act's three-strike rule and failed to show that an exception applied. (Doc. 5). Further, the Court has denied his Motion for Reconsideration. (Doc. 10). The Court has already denied the Plaintiff's Motion for Leave to Appeal In Forma Pauperis. (Docs. 13 and 14). The Plaintiff now moves again for leave to appeal in forma pauperis.
Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 24(a) sets out the requirements for an appellant in a civil case who wishes to proceed in forma pauperis. According to Rule 24(a)(1), the appellant "must attach an affidavit that...(A) shows in the detail prescribed by Form 4 of the Appendix of Forms [his] inability to pay or give security for the fees and costs; (B) claims an entitlement to redress; and (C) states the issues that [he] intends to present on appeal." Here, the Plaintiff's motions are insufficient in that they neither claim an entitlement to redress nor sufficiently state the issues that are presented on appeal. Therefore, the Plaintiff has failed to satisfy the requirements of Rule 24 and his Amended Motions are DENIED. If the Plaintiff wishes to proceed with his appeal, he must pay the entire $455.00 appellate filing fee.
___________
MARC T. TREADWELL, JUDGE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT