United States Court of Appeals
                                                                        Fifth Circuit
                                                                      F I L E D
                 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                         FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT                       September 21, 2006

                                                                   Charles R. Fulbruge III
                                No. 05-61182                               Clerk
                              Summary Calendar




JAMES BERNARD LAWSON,

                                           Petitioner-Appellant,

versus

LAWRENCE KELLY, Superintendent,

                                           Respondent-Appellee.



                        --------------------
            Appeal from the United States District Court
              for the Northern District of Mississippi
                            No. 4:05-MC-4
                        --------------------



Before SMITH, WIENER, and OWEN, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

      James Lawson seeks a certificate of appealability (“COA”) to

appeal the denial of his motions for recusal, for reconsideration,

and to proceed in forma pauperis.        His 28 U.S.C. § 2254 application

was never filed.      The district court denied his request for per-

mission to file the application and did not consider the § 2254

application.     Accordingly,     the   motion    for   COA   is    DENIED     as



      *
        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should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circum-
stances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.
                            No. 05-61182
                                 -2-

unnecessary.

     Lawson’s motions for recusal, reconsideration, and leave to

proceed in forma pauperis were unauthorized.     See United States v.

Early, 

, 142 (5th Cir. 1994).      Because he has appealed

from the denial of unauthorized motions, see 

is

DISMISSED for lack of jurisdiction.        His request to proceed in

forma pauperis is DENIED.