Johnson v. Tadlock

               IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                       FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

                        __________________

                            No. 98-50099
                         Summary Calendar
                        __________________


                       KENNETH LEE JOHNSON,

                                       Plaintiff-Appellant,

                              versus

 FRED C. TADLOCK; GARY BRITT; MARK SCOTT; WAYNE SCOTT, DIRECTOR,
TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE, INSTITUTIONAL DIVISION;
     J. DOE; J. DOE, II; J. DOE, III; THOMAS JAMES MCKINNEY;
        KENNETH B. GREEN, JR., Warden; RICHARD C. TEDFORD;
            JOHNNY W. SMITH; DENNIS L. HERRON, Captain,

                                         Defendants-Appellees.


                        - - - - - - - - - -
          Appeal from the United States District Court
                for the Western District of Texas
                       USDC No. W-95-CV-325
                        - - - - - - - - - -
                           June 17, 1998

Before DUHÉ, DeMOSS, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:1

     Kenneth Lee Johnson, Texas prisoner # 515059, appeals from the

district court’s dismissal of his civil rights suit for failure to

serve the defendants and for failure to prosecute.       Johnson's

motion to strike and replace his initial brief is GRANTED.


     1
        Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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 5TH CIR. R.
47.5.4.
     Johnson   argues   that    the   district   court   should   not   have

dismissed his complaint for failure to serve process, that the

court should have appointed a "special process server" for him, and

that the defendants should have been made to allow him to serve

them. The record reveals that Johnson has not shown good cause for

failing to serve the defendants within the time allowed.            FED. R.

CIV. P. 4(c), (m); Lambert v. United States, 44 F.3d 296, 299 (5th

Cir. 1995).    In addition, the dismissal of the suit was justified

in the light of Johnson's contumacious conduct.             See Berry v.

CIGNA/RSI-CIGNA, 975 F.2d 1188, 1191 (5th Cir. 1992).         This appeal

lacks arguable merit and is, therefore, frivolous. Howard v. King,

707 F.2d 215, 219-20 (5th Cir. 1983).        It is DISMISSED as such.

     Because of his demonstrated willingness to file frivolous

suits and appeals, Johnson is BARRED from filing any pleadings or

documents of any kind, either in the district courts of this

circuit or in this court, without advance written permission of a

judge of the forum court.      Any attempt by Johnson to file frivolous

pleadings in the future will result in further sanctions.

       MOTION TO STRIKE AND REPLACE THE BRIEF GRANTED; APPEAL

DISMISSED; BAR TO FILINGS RAISED.