United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
F I L E D
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT February 23, 2005
Charles R. Fulbruge III
Clerk
No. 04-10757
Conference Calendar
ERIC GANT,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
versus
STATE OF TEXAS; UNKNOWN STATE OFFICIALS,
Defendants-Appellees.
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of Texas
USDC No. 4:04-CV-394-Y
--------------------
Before BARKSDALE, GARZA, and STEWART, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Eric Gant appeals the 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B) dismissal of
his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 lawsuit challenging as unconstitutional
state court rulings against him. As the district court
determined, Gant’s claims are barred by the Rooker-Feldman**
doctrine. See Davis v. Bayless, 70 F.3d 367, 375 (5th Cir.
1995); Liedtke v. State Bar of Texas, 18 F.3d 315, 317 (5th Cir.
1994). Gant’s conclusional assertion that the Rooker-Feldman
*
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this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except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.
**
Rooker v. Fidelity Trust Co., 263 U.S. 413 (1923);
District of Columbia Court of Appeals v. Feldman, 460 U.S. 462
(1983).
No. 04-10757
-2-
doctrine does not apply to his case because any ruling in his
favor would not affect any state court rulings is patently
without merit; the face of his complaint sought reversal of the
state court rulings and the entry of judgment in his favor in the
challenged state court case.
Because the appeal raises no nonfrivolous issues, it is
DISMISSED. See Howard v. King, 707 F.2d 215, 219-20 (5th Cir.
1983); 5TH CIR. R. 42.2. We caution Gant that the filing or
prosecution of frivolous appeals will subject him to sanctions.
Gant should review all pending appeals to ensure that they are
not frivolous.
APPEAL DISMISSED; SANCTION WARNING ISSUED.