United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
F I L E D
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT December 9, 2003
Charles R. Fulbruge III
Clerk
No. 03-10750
Conference Calendar
MICHAEL ARTHUR MAGOON,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
versus
JANIE COCKRELL, DIRECTOR, TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF
CRIMINAL JUSTICE, INSTITUTIONAL DIVISION; GARY
JOHNSON; STATE OF TEXAS; TEXAS CORRECTIONAL
INDUSTRIES, also known as TCI; GREG ABBOTT, Attorney
General of Texas; SAMUEL B. KENT, Federal District
Judge; JOHN FORESCHNER, Federal Magistrate,
Defendants-Appellees.
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of Texas
USDC No. 3:03-CV-01177-N
--------------------
Before DAVIS, EMILIO M. GARZA, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Michael Arthur Magoon, a Texas resident and former Texas
prisoner, challenges the district court’s denial of his
application to proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP”) on appeal
following the district court’s dismissal of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983
complaint as duplicative of another of his lawsuits. Magoon is
effectively challenging the district court’s certification that
*
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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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. 03-10750
-2-
he should not be granted IFP status because his appeal is not
taken in good faith. See Baugh v. Taylor, 117 F.3d 197, 202 (5th
Cir. 1997); 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3); FED. R. APP. P. 24(a).
By not directing his motion solely to the district court’s
reasons for the certification decision, Magoon has effectively
abandoned the only issue that is properly before this court. See
Baugh, 117 F.3d at 202; Yohey v. Collins, 985 F.2d 222, 224-25
(5th Cir. 1993). Accordingly, Magoon’s motion to proceed IFP is
DENIED, and his appeal is DISMISSED as frivolous. See Baugh, 117
F.3d at 202 & n.24; 5TH CIR. R. 42.2.
IFP DENIED; APPEAL DISMISSED AS FRIVOLOUS.