IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 95-10620
Conference Calendar
JOHN H. CLOUD,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
versus
TOM BARR,
Defendant-Appellee.
- - - - - - - - - -
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of Texas
USDC No. 3:95CV00633
- - - - - - - - - -
August 22, 1996
Before KING, DUHÉ, and DeMOSS, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
John H. Cloud appeals the district court’s denial of his
second motion for reconsideration under Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b).
Cloud has not shown that the district court’s denial of his Rule
60(b) motion was “so unwarranted as to constitute an abuse of
discretion.” Seven Elves, Inc. v. Eskenazi, 635 F.2d 396, 402
(5th Cir. 1981). Cloud has not shown that his allegations
against Tom Barr, a private attorney, or Melody Rae Cloud, the
*
Pursuant to Local Rule 47.5, the court has determined
that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent
except under the limited circumstances set forth in Local Rule
47.5.4.
No. 95-10620
- 2 -
defendants he sought to add, state a claim for a violation of his
constitutional rights under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. See Resident
Council of Allen Parkway Village v. U.S. Dep’t of Housing and
Urban Dev., 980 F.2d 1043, 1050 (5th Cir). cert. denied, 114 S.
Ct. 75 (1993). Cloud also sought to add Layne Jackson, an
assistant district attorney for Dallas County, Texas, as a
defendant in his Rule 60(b) motion. Although Jackson would be
considered a state actor, Cloud has not shown that the district
court’s denial of his Rule 60(b) motion, including his request to
add Jackson as a defendant, was “so unwarranted as to constitute
an abuse of discretion” especially since the district court had
allowed Cloud to file six amended complaints. See Seven Elves,
Inc., 635 F.2d at 402.
Cloud’s appeal is without an arguable basis in fact or law
and is thus frivolous. see Howard v. King, 707 F.2d 215, 219-20
(5th Cir. 1983). Accordingly, Cloud’s appeal is DISMISSED AS
FRIVOLOUS. We caution Cloud that any future frivolous appeals
filed by him or on his behalf will invite the imposition of
sanctions. To avoid sanctions, Cloud is cautioned further to
review any pending appeals to ensure that they do not raise
arguments that are frivolous.
APPEAL DISMISSED; SANCTION WARNING ISSUED.