IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 96-50275
Conference Calendar
JOE E. PERRYMAN,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
versus
EDWARD C. PRADO, Judge,
Defendant-Appellee.
----------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Texas
USDC No. 94-CV-350
----------
August 22, 1996
Before KING, DUHÉ, and DeMOSS, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Joe E. Perryman appeals the district court’s denial of his motion for relief from judgment
or order pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b). Perryman 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).
*
Pursuant to Local Rule 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be
published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in Local Rule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.
Perryman’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, Perryman’s appeal is
DISMISSED AS FRIVOLOUS. See 5th Cir. R. 42.2. Perryman’s motions are DENIED.
We previously warned Perryman in Perryman v. Hudspeth, No. 95-50907
(5th Cir. June 25, 1996), that further frivolous appeals would invite the imposition of sanctions.
Accordingly, Perryman is barred from filing any pro se, in forma
pauperis, civil appeal in this court, or any pro se, in forma
pauperis, initial civil pleading in any court which is subject to
this court's jurisdiction, without the advance written permission
of a judge of the forum court or of this court; the clerk of this
court and the clerks of all federal district courts in this
Circuit are directed to return to Perryman, unfiled, any
attempted submission inconsistent with this bar.
APPEAL DISMISSED; SANCTION IMPOSED.