IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 98-40103
Conference Calendar
JIHAAD A.M.E. SAAHIR,
f/k/a Jehad Abdullah Shabazz,
a/k/a James Loggins,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
versus
W.J. ESTELLE, JR., ET AL,
Defendants-Appellees.
- - - - - - - - - -
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of Texas
USDC No. 6:83-CV-225
- - - - - - - - - -
December 10, 1998
Before DAVIS, DeMOSS and STEWART, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Jihaad A.M.E. Saahir, formerly known as Jehad Abdullah
Shabazz, a/k/a James Loggins, Texas prisoner # 291515, appeals
the district court’s denial of his motion for contempt to enforce
the settlement agreement in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action. Saahir
argues that the district court erred in dismissing his motion for
civil contempt and damages because the settlement agreement
specifically states that the defendants would recognize him by
*
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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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.
No. 98-40103
-2-
his legal name ONLY and because Felix v. Rolan, 833 F.2d 517 (5th
Cir. 1987) was not decided at the time the settlement was agreed
upon and so is not controlling in this case. He argues that his
claims are related to the settlement agreement because he lost
his property and was denied indigent supplies because he used his
religious name in compliance with the agreement, and the
defendants refused to recognize his legally religious name only,
contrary to the agreement.
We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion
and find that the district court did not abuse its discretion in
dismissing Saahir’s motion for contempt. Siglar v. Hightower,
112 F.3d 191, 193 (5th Cir. 1997). Further, we hold that
Saahir’s appeal is without arguable merit and is frivolous. See
Howard v. King, 707 F.2d 215, 219-20 (5th Cir. 1983). Because
the appeal is frivolous, it is DISMISSED. See 5th Cir. R. 42.2.
We cautioned Saahir in his last appeal from the denial of a
contempt motion in this case that any additional frivolous
appeals would invite the imposition of sanctions. See Saahir v.
Estelle, No. 95-40633 (5th Cir. Dec. 19, 1995). Accordingly,
Saahir is BARRED from filing any pro se, in forma pauperis, civil
appeal in this court without the prior written approval of an
active judge of this court. Further he is BARRED from filing 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. The
clerk of this court and the clerks of all federal district courts
No. 98-40103
-3-
subject to the jurisdiction of this court are directed to return
to Saahir, unfiled, any attempted submission inconsistent with
this bar.
APPEAL DISMISSED; SANCTIONS IMPOSED.