Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Reed v. San Antonio Aerospac, 08-50230 (2008)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit Number: 08-50230 Visitors: 90
Filed: Dec. 10, 2008
Latest Update: Feb. 21, 2020
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED December 10, 2008 No. 08-50230 Conference Calendar Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk LEVI REED, JR Plaintiff-Appellant v. SAN ANTONIO AEROSPACE, LP Defendant-Appellee Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. 5:05-CV-186 Before DAVIS, WIENER, and PRADO, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Levi Reed, Jr., moves this court for leave to proceed in forma p
More
          IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                   FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT United States Court of Appeals
                                                  Fifth Circuit

                                                                  FILED
                                                               December 10, 2008
                                No. 08-50230
                             Conference Calendar             Charles R. Fulbruge III
                                                                     Clerk

LEVI REED, JR

                                            Plaintiff-Appellant

v.

SAN ANTONIO AEROSPACE, LP

                                            Defendant-Appellee


                 Appeal from the United States District Court
                      for the Western District of Texas
                           USDC No. 5:05-CV-186


Before DAVIS, WIENER, and PRADO, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
      Levi Reed, Jr., moves this court for leave to proceed in forma pauperis
(IFP) on appeal from the summary-judgment dismissal of his employment
discrimination lawsuit. By moving for IFP, Reed challenges the district court’s
certification that the appeal is not taken in good faith. See Baugh v. Taylor, 
117 F.3d 197
, 202 (5th Cir. 1997).




      *
      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should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited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. 08-50230

      Reed has abandoned by failing to brief any argument challenging the
district court’s reasons for dismissing his lawsuit. See Brinkmann v. Dallas
County Deputy Sheriff Abner, 
813 F.2d 744
, 748 (5th Cir. 1987). Reed thus has
not shown that he will present a nonfrivolous issue on appeal. See Howard v.
King, 
707 F.2d 215
, 220 (5th Cir. 1983). Accordingly, the motion for leave to
proceed IFP is denied, and the appeal is dismissed as frivolous. See 
Baugh, 117 F.3d at 202
n.24; 5TH CIR. R. 42.2.
      IFP MOTION DENIED; APPEAL DISMISSED.




                                      2

Source:  CourtListener

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer