Filed: Dec. 14, 2017
Latest Update: Mar. 03, 2020
Summary: FILED United States Court of Appeals Tenth Circuit UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS December 14, 2017 Elisabeth A. Shumaker TENTH CIRCUIT Clerk of Court TYRONE HURT, Plaintiff - Appellant, and No. 17-6138 AFRICAN AMERICANS, D.C. No. 5:17-CV-00477-R (W.D. Okla.) Plaintiff, v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Defendant - Appellee. ORDER AND JUDGMENT * Before KELLY, MURPHY, and MATHESON, Circuit Judges. After examining Appellant’s brief and the appellate record, this court has determined unanimously that or
Summary: FILED United States Court of Appeals Tenth Circuit UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS December 14, 2017 Elisabeth A. Shumaker TENTH CIRCUIT Clerk of Court TYRONE HURT, Plaintiff - Appellant, and No. 17-6138 AFRICAN AMERICANS, D.C. No. 5:17-CV-00477-R (W.D. Okla.) Plaintiff, v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Defendant - Appellee. ORDER AND JUDGMENT * Before KELLY, MURPHY, and MATHESON, Circuit Judges. After examining Appellant’s brief and the appellate record, this court has determined unanimously that ora..
More
FILED
United States Court of Appeals
Tenth Circuit
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS December 14, 2017
Elisabeth A. Shumaker
TENTH CIRCUIT Clerk of Court
TYRONE HURT,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
and
No. 17-6138
AFRICAN AMERICANS,
D.C. No. 5:17-CV-00477-R
(W.D. Okla.)
Plaintiff,
v.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Defendant - Appellee.
ORDER AND JUDGMENT *
Before KELLY, MURPHY, and MATHESON, Circuit Judges.
After examining Appellant’s brief and the appellate record, this court has
determined unanimously that oral argument would not materially assist the
adjudication of this appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2); 10th Cir. R. 34.1(G).
The case is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument.
*
This order and judgment is not binding precedent except under the
doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, and collateral estoppel. It may be cited,
however, for its persuasive value consistent with Fed. R. App. P. 32.1 and 10th
Cir. R. 32.1.
Proceeding pro se, Tyrone Hurt appeals the district court’s dismissal of the
complaint he filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1981. The complaint was dismissed
without prejudice when Hurt failed to comply with the district court’s order to file
a legible amended complaint clarifying the claims being asserted. Hurt’s
appellate brief, like his complaint, is nearly illegible. It focuses on Hurt’s request
to proceed in forma pauperis and contains no clear argument as to why the district
court’s judgment should be reversed.
Having reviewed the record and Hurt’s appellate filings, this court
concludes Hurt’s appeal is “without merit in that it lacks an arguable basis in
either law or fact.” Thompson v. Gibson,
289 F.3d 1218, 1222 (10th Cir. 2002).
We, thus, dismiss the appeal as frivolous pursuant to 28 U.S.C.
§ 1915(e)(2)(B)(i). See Lister v. Dep’t of Treasury,
408 F.3d 1309, 1312 (10th
Cir. 2005) (noting § 1915 applies to all litigants seeking to proceed in forma
pauperis). We also deny Hurt’s motion to proceed in forma pauperis and remind
him of his responsibility to make immediate payment of any unpaid balance of the
appellate filing fee.
ENTERED FOR THE COURT
Michael R. Murphy
Circuit Judge
-2-