UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA Moutazbillah Abdul Sattar, Civ. No. 25-798 (PAM/DLM) Plaintiff, v. MEMORANDUM AND ORDER Hennepin Health Care System, Defendant.

This matter is before the Court on Plaintiff’s Application to Proceed In Forma Pauperis on Appeal. (Docket No. 6.) Under 28 U.S.C. § 1915, the Court may authorize a party to proceed without prepayment of fees, costs, or security, on the affidavit of a party testifying that he is unable to pay such costs, describing the nature of the appeal and his belief that he is entitled to redress. However, the Court will deny IFP status if it finds that the appeal is not “taken in good faith.” Id. § 1915(a)(3). Good faith is judged objectively; an appeal is not taken in good faith when it is “factually or legally frivolous.”

Crawford v. State of Minn., Civ. No. 04-2822, 2005 WL 1843329, at *1 (D. Minn. Aug.

2, 2005) (Tunheim, J.).

The Court cannot conclude that Plaintiff’s appeal is taken in good faith. The Court dismissed this matter because Plaintiff’s Complaint is untimely and fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. (Docket No. 3.) Any appeal would be “frivolous . . . lack[ing] an arguable basis in either in law or in fact.” Neitzke v. Williams, 490 U.S. 319, 325 (1989).

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Application to Proceed In Forma Pauperis on Appeal (Docket No. 6) is DENIED.

Dated: March 24, 2025 s/ Paul A. Magnuson Paul A. Magnuson United States District Court Judge

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA Moutazbillah Abdul Sattar, Civ. No. 25-798 (PAM/DLM) Plaintiff, v. MEMORANDUM AND ORDER Hennepin Health Care System, Defendant.

This matter is before the Court on Plaintiff’s Application to Proceed In Forma Pauperis on Appeal. (Docket No. 6.) Under 28 U.S.C. § 1915, the Court may authorize a party to proceed without prepayment of fees, costs, or security, on the affidavit of a party testifying that he is unable to pay such costs, describing the nature of the appeal and his belief that he is entitled to redress. However, the Court will deny IFP status if it finds that the appeal is not “taken in good faith.” Id. § 1915(a)(3). Good faith is judged objectively; an appeal is not taken in good faith when it is “factually or legally frivolous.”

Crawford v. State of Minn., Civ. No. 04-2822, 2005 WL 1843329, at *1 (D. Minn. Aug.

2, 2005) (Tunheim, J.).

The Court cannot conclude that Plaintiff’s appeal is taken in good faith. The Court dismissed this matter because Plaintiff’s Complaint is untimely and fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. (Docket No. 3.) Any appeal would be “frivolous . . . lack[ing] an arguable basis in either in law or in fact.” Neitzke v. Williams, 490 U.S. 319, 325 (1989).

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Application to Proceed In Forma Pauperis on Appeal (Docket No. 6) is DENIED.

Dated: March 24, 2025 s/ Paul A. Magnuson Paul A. Magnuson United States District Court Judge