REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

THOMAS B. McCOUN, III, Magistrate Judge.

Before the court is Defendant's Motion to Proceed In Forma Pauperis (Dkt. 179).

Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(1), a court may authorize the commencement of an appeal without prepayment of fees by a person who submits an affidavit demonstrating an inability to pay such fees. However,"the court shall dismiss [a] case at any time if the court determines that . . . the action or appeal . . . is frivolous or malicious." 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i).

On March 13, 2012, the court denied Defendant's motion for writ of mandamus. (Dkt. 170, 172). Defendant filed a notice of appeal as to the above-referenced order on April 3, 2012. (Dkt. 175).

Defendant had fourteen days to file a notice of appeal as to the March 13, 2012, order. See Fed. R. App. P. 4(b)(1)(A)(i); see also United States v. Vicaria, 963 F.2d 1412, 1413-14 (11th Cir. 1992). Nonetheless, his notice of appeal was filed on April 3, 2012, twenty-one days later. Although the court could extend the deadline for Defendant's notice of appeal no more than thirty days, Defendant has not shown excusable neglect or good cause justifying such an extension. See Fed. R. App. P. 4(b)(4). Therefore, the untimeliness of his notice of appeal should not be excused.

Because Defendant's notice of appeal is not timely as to the challenged order, the appeal should be dismissed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i).

Accordingly and upon consideration, it is RECOMMENDED that:

(1) Defendant's Motion to Proceed In Forma Pauperis (Dkt. 179) be DENIED.