Filed: Apr. 09, 2021
Latest Update: Apr. 10, 2021
United States Court of Appeals
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT
____________
No. 21-7002 September Term, 2020
1:20-cv-02883-UNA
Filed On: April 9, 2021
Huguette Nicole Young,
Appellant
v.
Muriel Bowser,
Appellee
ON APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
BEFORE: Rogers and Wilkins, Circuit Judges, and Sentelle, Senior Circuit
Judge
JUDGMENT
This appeal was considered on the record from the United States District Court
for the District of Columbia and on the brief and appendix filed by appellant. See Fed.
R. App. P. 34(a)(2); D.C. Cir. Rule 34(j). It is
ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the district court’s order filed December 22,
2020, be affirmed. Appellant does not dispute that she failed to comply with the district
court’s order directing her to pay the filing fee or to submit a completed motion for leave
to proceed in forma pauperis (IFP). On appeal, she has presented no valid arguments
demonstrating that the requirement that she pay the full district court filing fee or file a
properly-supported IFP motion violates her constitutional rights. See 28 U.S.C.
§ 1915(a)(1); cf. Ibrahim v. District of Columbia,
208 F.3d 1032, 1036 (D.C. Cir. 2000)
(“Leave to file a claim in forma pauperis has always been a matter of grace, a privilege
granted in the court’s discretion.”). Accordingly, the district court appropriately denied
the motion for reconsideration and dismissed the case.
United States Court of Appeals
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT
____________
No. 21-7002 September Term, 2020
Pursuant to D.C. Circuit Rule 36, this disposition will not be published. The Clerk
is directed to withhold issuance of the mandate herein until seven days after resolution
of any timely petition for rehearing or petition for rehearing en banc. See Fed. R. App.
P. 41(b); D.C. Cir. Rule 41.
Per Curiam
FOR THE COURT:
Mark J. Langer, Clerk
BY: /s/
Daniel J. Reidy
Deputy Clerk
Page 2