United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
F I L E D
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT February 17, 2004
Charles R. Fulbruge III
Clerk
No. 03-10599
Conference Calendar
JOHN T. ESPINOZA,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
versus
THE CITY OF FORT WORTH,
Defendant-Appellee.
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of Texas
USDC No. 4:00-CV-01623
--------------------
Before HIGGINBOTHAM, EMILIO M. GARZA, and PRADO, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
John T. Espinoza has filed an application for leave to
proceed in forma pauperis (IFP) on appeal following the district
court’s unfiling of his fifth postjudgment motion to vacate the
denial of relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action, which has
already been affirmed on direct appeal by this court. By moving
for leave to proceed IFP, Espinoza is challenging the district
court’s certification that IFP should not be granted on appeal
*
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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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. 03-10599
-2-
because his appeal is not taken in good faith. See Baugh v.
Taylor, 117 F.3d 197, 202 (5th Cir. 1997).
Espinoza has not made a meritorious challenge to the
district court’s denial of IFP and has not shown that he will
raise a nonfrivolous issue on appeal. See 28 U.S.C.
§ 1915(a)(3). Espinoza’s request for IFP status is DENIED, and
his appeal is DISMISSED as frivolous. See Baugh, 117 F.3d at 202
& n.24; 5TH CIR. R. 42.2.
Espinoza is also cautioned that any additional frivolous
appeals filed by him will invite the imposition of sanctions. To
avoid sanctions, Espinoza should review any newly filed appeals
to ensure that they are not frivolous.
MOTION DENIED. APPEAL DISMISSED. SANCTIONS WARNING GIVEN.