Case: 20-20381 Document: 00516007375 Page: 1 Date Filed: 09/09/2021
United States Court of Appeals
for the Fifth Circuit United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
FILED
September 9, 2021
No. 20-20381 Lyle W. Cayce
Summary Calendar Clerk
Michael Cardora Roberson,
Plaintiff—Appellant,
versus
Joe Morgan, Senior Practice Manager; Angela Cooling, Cluster
Nurser Manager; Tiffany Bowens, Nurse; Bridget E. Payne,
Correctional Officer; Thomas H Butler, Lieutenant; Timothy C.
Knott, Sergeant; Richard A. Gunnels, Warden I; Debra R.
Booker, Assistant Warden,
Defendants—Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Texas
USDC No. 4:20-CV-2028
Before Southwick, Graves, and Costa, Circuit Judges.
Per Curiam:*
*
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opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited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: 20-20381 Document: 00516007375 Page: 2 Date Filed: 09/09/2021
No. 20-20381
Michael Cardora Roberson, Texas prisoner # 2167695, has filed a
motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis (IFP) on appeal as a sanctioned
litigant following the district court’s dismissal pursuant to 28 U.S.C.
§ 1915(g) of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action. Roberson argues that he and his
family face an imminent danger of serious bodily injury, that he should be
allowed to amend his complaint, and that the mere invocation of an imminent
danger claim is sufficient to qualify for the § 1915(g) exception. He also
moves for the appointment of counsel. Roberson’s speculative and
conclusory allegations are insufficient to make the showing required to avoid
application of the three strikes bar under § 1915(g). See Baños v. O’Guin, 144
F.3d 883, 884-85 (5th Cir. 1998).
Accordingly, Roberson’s motion for leave to proceed IFP on appeal is
DENIED. For the same reasons, his appeal from the district court’s
dismissal of his § 1983 complaint is frivolous and is DISMISSED. See 5th
Cir. R. 42.2; Baugh v. Taylor, 117 F.3d 197, 202 & n.24 (5th Cir. 1997).
Roberson’s motion for the appointment of counsel is also DENIED.
Roberson is WARNED that frivolous, repetitive, or otherwise abusive
filings will invite the imposition of other 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. See Coghlan v.
Starkey, 852 F.2d 806, 817 n.21 (5th Cir. 1988).
2