IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 01-30801
Summary Calendar
ALVIN WASHINGTON,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
versus
19TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT; LOUISIANA STATE BOARD OF
PRIVATE SECURITY EXAMINERS; LOUISIANA BOARD OF PARDONS AND
PAROLE,
Defendants-Appellees.
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Middle District of Louisiana
USDC No. 01-CV-267-C
--------------------
December 6, 2001
Before DAVIS, BENAVIDES, and STEWART, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Alvin Washington moves for leave to proceed in forma
pauperis (IFP) after failing to obtain leave of the district
court to proceed IFP. The magistrate judge found that
Washington’s appeal was taken in bad faith and Washington does
not argue that the magistrate judge lacked authority to make such
a finding. Washington moves for relief pursuant to FED. R. CIV.
P. 60(b). His Rule 60(b) motion is DENIED.
*
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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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. 01-30801
-2-
Washington seeks to appeal IFP from the dismissal of his
civil-rights action as frivolous and for failure to state a
claim. He has failed to argue that the defendants were not
entitled to immunity from liability for damages beyond stating
the issue. He has failed to brief that issue for appeal.
Brinkmann v. Dallas County Deputy Sheriff Abner, 813 F.2d 744,
748 (5th Cir. 1987). Nor does Washington brief whether the
district court erred by determining that he had failed to state a
claim. Id. Washington has failed to brief the bases for the
bad-faith determination and the dismissal of his action.
Washington’s appeal is without arguable merit and is
frivolous. Howard v. King, 707 F.2d 215, 219-20 (5th Cir. 1983).
Because the appeal is frivolous, Washington’s IFP motion is
DENIED and his appeal is DISMISSED. 5TH CIR. R. 42.2.
We caution Washington that any additional frivolous appeals
filed by him will invite the imposition of sanctions. To avoid
sanctions, Washington is further cautioned to review any pending
appeals to ensure that they do not raise arguments that are
frivolous. All of appellant’s pending motions are denied.
IFP DENIED; APPEAL DISMISSED. 5TH CIR. R. 42.2. SANCTIONS
WARNING ISSUED.