Opinion
No. 03 C 4767
March 30, 2004
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff sought to pursue a claim in forma pauperis, We concluded on August 27, 2003, that it lacked any merit, and accordingly denied leave to file in forma pauperis, We denied plaintiff's motion for reconsideration on September 24, 2003.
On October 24, 2003, plaintiff filed a notice of appeal. That same day he filed yet another motion in this court, this time to reinstate the case, grant leave to proceed in forma pauperis, and to appoint counsel. We did not act on that motion because we believed we no longer had jurisdiction. Apparently the Court of Appeals has delayed the prosecution of the appeal because of the motion before this court. The appeal has, accordingly, languished. To permit plaintiff to take whatever action he wishes and can pursue on appeal, we deny the motion to reinstate. We once again deny the motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis and deny the motion to appoint counsel, recognizing some uncertainty as to our jurisdiction to rule on the second and third prongs of his motion once we have denied his motion to reinstate (and also doubting our jurisdiction to rule on his motion to reinstate, other than to deny it on the basis of lack of jurisdiction in light of his simultaneous notice of appeal). If the motion is pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 24, for leave to appeal in forma pauperis, the motion is denied for the reasons stated in the Memoranda and Orders of August 27 and September 24, 2003.