IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS DIVISION COREY EVAN ROBESON, #57120-177, § Petitioner, § § v. § CIVIL NO. 3:22-CV-1564-D § MICHAEL J. HARRIS, § Respondent. § ORDER The United States Magistrate Judge made findings, conclusions, and a recommendation in this case. No objections were filed. The undersigned district judge reviewed the proposed findings, conclusions, and recommendation for plain error. Finding none, the court adopts the findings, conclusions, and recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge. 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 support of this finding, the court adopts and incorporates by reference the magistrate judge’s findings, conclusions, and recommendation. See Baugh v. Taylor,

, 202 n.21 (5th 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). If petitioner appeals, petitioner 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). If petitioner appeals (_) petitioner may proceed in forma pauperis on appeal. (X ) petitioner must pay the $505.00 appellate filing fee or submit a motion to proceed in forma pauperis. SO ORDERED. September 6, 2022.

SIONE A. Lol SENIOR JUDGE