Opinion
Civil Action No. 12-cv-01605-BNB
07-26-2012
ABEER HUMOOD, Plaintiff, v. THE CITY OF AURORA, COLORADO, a municipal corporation, WILKINSON (Officer #256460), an individual, JASON CONDREAY, an individual, PONICH (Officer #301367), an individual, KEN SULLIVAN, in his official capacity as a member of the Civil Service Commission in the City of Aurora, DEB WALLACE, in her official capacity as a member of the Civil Service Commission in the City of Aurora, BERNARD CELESTIN, in his official capacity as a member of the Civil Service Commission in the City of Aurora, SANDRA SWEENEY, in her official capacity as a member of the Civil Service Commission in the City of Aurora, and DAVE WILLIAMS, in his official capacity as a member of the Civil Service Commission in the City of Aurora, Defendants.
ORDER OF DISMISSAL
Plaintiff, Abeer Humood, initiated this action by filing pro se a complaint (ECF No. 2). On June 21, 2012, Magistrate Judge Boyd N. Boland entered an order directing Mr. Humood to cure a deficiency if he wished to pursue his claims. Specifically, Magistrate Judge Boland ordered Mr. Humood either to pay the $350.00 filing fee or to file a Motion and Affidavit for Leave to Proceed Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915. Mr. Humood was warned that the complaint and the action would be dismissed without further notice if he failed to cure the deficiency within thirty days.
Mr. Humood has failed to cure the deficiency within the time allowed and he has failed to respond in any way to Magistrate Judge Boland's June 21 order. Therefore, the complaint and the action will be dismissed without prejudice for failure to cure the deficiency.
Furthermore, the Court certifies pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal from this order would not be taken in good faith and therefore in forma pauperis status will be denied for the purpose of appeal. See Coppedge v. United States, 369 U.S. 438 (1962). If Plaintiff files a notice of appeal he also must pay the full $455 appellate filing fee or file a motion to proceed in forma pauperis in the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit within thirty days in accordance with Fed. R. App. P. 24. Accordingly, it is
ORDERED that the complaint and the action are dismissed without prejudice pursuant to Rule 41(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure because Mr. Humood failed to cure the deficiency as directed. It is
FURTHER ORDERED that leave to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal is denied without prejudice to the filing of a motion seeking leave to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal in the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit.
DATED at Denver, Colorado, this 26th day of July, 2012.
BY THE COURT:
______________________________
LEWIS T. BABCOCK, Senior Judge
United States District Court