Case: 20-10749 Document: 00515802361 Page: 1 Date Filed: 03/30/2021
United States Court of Appeals
for the Fifth Circuit United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
FILED
March 30, 2021
No. 20-10749
Lyle W. Cayce
Clerk
Chief Michael S. Owl Feather-Gorbey,
Plaintiff—Appellant,
versus
Administrator Federal Bureau of Prisons Grand
Prairie; Federal Bureau of Prisons United States,
Defendants—Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of Texas
USDC No. 3:17-CV-26
Before Willett, Ho, and Duncan, Circuit Judges.
Per Curiam:*
Chief Michael S. Owl Feather-Gorbey, federal prisoner # 33405-013,
moves this court for authorization to proceed in forma pauperis (IFP)
following the district court’s denial of his Federal Rule of Civil Procedure
60(b) motions challenging the dismissal without prejudice of his complaint
*
Pursuant to 5th Circuit Rule 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opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited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 Circuit Rule 47.5.4.
Case: 20-10749 Document: 00515802361 Page: 2 Date Filed: 03/30/2021
No. 20-10749
as barred by 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). Feather-Gorbey has failed to show that he
should be allowed to proceed IFP on appeal under § 1915(g). See Baños v.
O’Guin, 144 F.3d 883, 885 (5th Cir. 1998). Further, his argument that the
district court violated his right of access to the courts lacks merit. See Carson
v. Johnson, 112 F.3d 818, 821 (5th Cir. 1997). Accordingly, Feather-Gorbey’s
motion for leave to proceed IFP is DENIED. Further, because the facts
surrounding the IFP decision are “inextricably intertwined” with the merits
of the issues raised in Feather-Gorbey’s Rule 60(b) motions, his appeal from
the district court’s denial of these motions is frivolous and is DISMISSED.
See 5th Cir. R. 42.2; Baugh v. Taylor, 117 F.3d 197, 202 & n.24 (5th Cir.
1997). Feather-Gorbey’s motions for judicial notice are DENIED. See Fed.
R. Evid. 201(b). And in any event, to the extent that he seeks to supplement
the record in support of his IFP motion, the new evidence that he has
provided fails to show that he is in imminent danger as a result of the denial
of medical care.
The dismissal of this appeal counts as a strike under § 1915(g). See
Coleman v. Tollefson, 135 S. Ct. 1759, 1763 (2015). Feather-Gorbey is
CAUTIONED that he has been barred previously and remains barred from
proceeding IFP in any civil action or appeal filed while he is incarcerated or
detained in any facility unless he is under imminent danger of serious physical
injury. See § 1915(g). He is further CAUTIONED that frivolous, repetitive,
or otherwise abusive filings will invite the imposition of additional sanctions,
which may include dismissal, monetary sanctions, and restrictions on his
ability to file pleadings in this court and any court subject to this court’s
jurisdiction. To avoid sanctions, Feather-Gorbey should review any pending
appeals and actions he may have pending and move to dismiss any frivolous
ones.
2