Opinion
18-cv-1058
06-26-2023
CALVIN TANKESLY, Plaintiff, v. ARAMARK CORRECTIONAL SERVICES, et al., Defendants.
ORDER DENYING AS MOOT MOTION TO APPEAL IN FORMA PAUPERIS
SAMUEL H. MAYS, JR., UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Before the Court is Plaintiff Calvin Tankesly's September 1, 2022 pro se Motion to Appeal In Forma Pauperis. (ECF No. 71.) Plaintiff's prior motion to proceed before this Court in forma pauperis was granted. (ECF Nos. 2, 4.) Because he was granted pauper status before this Court, Plaintiff was entitled to appeal in forma pauperis without further authorization from this Court. Fed. R. App. P. 24(a)(3). Plaintiff's Motion, ECF No. 71, is therefore DENIED as moot.
Plaintiff failed to appeal in a timely manner, and his appeal was dismissed by the Sixth Circuit for lack of jurisdiction. (ECF No. 73.)
Although a district court may remove a litigant's entitlement to appeal in forma pauperis by certifying that an appeal would not be taken in good faith, the Court did not do so in its order disposing of the case and declines to do so now. (See ECF No. 68.)
SO ORDERED.