United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida

Jonathan Lewis, Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) Case No. 19-61453-Civ-Scola ) Florida Department of Corrections, ) Defendant. )

Order Denying Motion for Leave to Appeal In Forma Pauperis Plaintiff Jonathan Lewis has moved for leave to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal. The Court denies this motion for two reasons: (1) the motion does not satisfy the requirements of Rule 24(a)(1) of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure, and (2) Lewis’s appeal is not taken in good faith. Either of these reasons is sufficient on its own to deny the motion. Rule 24(a)(1) of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure provides that a party filing a motion in district court seeking to appeal in forma pauperis must attach an affidavit to the motion that, among other things, “claims an entitlement to redress” and “states the issues that the party intends to present on appeal.” Fed. R. App. P. 24(a)(1)(B)–(C). Lewis’s motion fails to do either. (See Pl.’s Mot. ECF No. 25). Instead Lewis points to, it appears, logistical difficulties he has encountered at the jail in acquiring his inmate banking statement. He also complains that he has not received various forms he has requested from the Clerk of this Court. (Id.) In another filing, also apparently having to do with his motion to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal, Lewis complains that various documents have been misfiled by the Court and that he has not received copies of certain orders and recommendations that were entered on the docket. (Pl.’s “Emergency Belated Motion,” ECF No. 24.) Much of Lewis’s presentation, in both filings, is difficult to discern. In short, he not identified any issues he intends to present on appeal nor has he stated a claim to an actual entitlement to redress. Further, Lewis’s motion is not taken in good faith. “An appeal may not be taken in forma pauperis if the trial court certifies in writing that it is not taken in good faith.”

(a)(3). “A party demonstrates good faith by seeking appellate review of any issue that is not frivolous when examined under an objective standard.” Ghee v. Retailers National Bank,

(11th Cir. 2008). An appeal filed in forma pauperis is frivolous “when it appears the plaintiff has little or no chance of success,” meaning that the “factual allegations are clearly baseless or that the legal theories are indisputably meritless.” Carroll v. Gross,

(11th Cir. 1993) (internal quotation marks omitted). Lewis’s appeal appears to have little or no chance of success: he does not even suggest, never mind actually set forth, a legal theory that appears to have any merit. For the reasons set forth above, the Court denies Lewis’s motions for leave to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal (ECF Nos. 24, 25). The Clerk is directed to mail a copy of this order to the Plaintiff at the address listed below. Done and ordered, at Miami, Florida, on January 27, 2020.

Robert N. Scola, Jr. United States District Judge Copy via U.S. mail to: Jonathan Lewis, #131900598 Broward County Main Jail Inmate Mail/Parcels 955 SW 1st Avenue Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301