UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS DIVISION

PAMELA TITUS, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) CIVIL ACTION NO. VS. ) ) 3:19-CV-2237-G (BK) PROGRESSIVE INSURANCE ) COMPANY COUNTY MUTUAL, ) ) Defendant. ) ORDER ACCEPTING FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE The United States Magistrate Judge made findings, conclusions, and a recommendation in this case. No objections were filed. The district court reviewed the proposed findings, conclusions, and recommendation for plain error. Finding none, the court ACCEPTS the findings, conclusions, and recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge. It is therefore ORDERED that this action is DISMISSED without prejudice for failure to comply with a court order and for want of prosecution. See FED. R. CIV. P. 41(b). Plaintiff’s motion to proceed in forma pauperis is also DENIED. The court prospectively CERTIFIES that any appeal of this action would not be taken in good faith. See

(a)(3); FED. R. APP. P. 24(a)(3). In magistrate judge’s findings, conclusions, and recommendation. See Baugh v. Taylor,

, 202 and n.2] (Sth Cir. 1997). Based on the findings and recommendation, the court finds that any appeal of this action would present no legal point of arguable merit and would, therefore, be frivolous. Howard v. King,

(5th Cir. 1983). In the event of an appeal, plaintiff may challenge this certification by filing a separate motion to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal with the Clerk of the Court, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit. See Baugh,

; FED. R. APP. P. 24(a)(5). SO ORDERED. November 12, 2019.

(Jue Fob A. JOE FISH Senior United States District Judge

, Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 4(a) governs the time to appeal an order. A timely notice of appeal must be filed even if the district court certifies an appeal as not taken in good faith. -2-