Appellate Case: 25-1002 Document: 12-1 Date Filed: 03/31/2025 Page: 1 FILED United States Court of Appeals UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS Tenth Circuit

FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT March 31, 2025 _________________________________ Christopher M. Wolpert Clerk of Court GINA BLANTON,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

v. No. 25-1002 (D.C. No. 1:24-CV-03015-LTB) JASON DAVID YOUNG, (D. Colo.)

Defendant - Appellee. _________________________________

ORDER AND JUDGMENT* _________________________________

Before HARTZ, EID, and CARSON, Circuit Judges. _________________________________

Plaintiff Gina Blanton, proceeding pro se, appeals the district court’s dismissal of

her case. ECF No. 8 at 1. Plaintiff’s complaint and opening brief appear to assert various

constitutional and Colorado-state statutory claims against defendant Jason Young for

“coerc[ing] an officer to take [Plaintiff’s] child by police force without a warrant or

imminent danger threat with the statement that a civil temporary order existed[,] [even

though] [n]o Civil case has ever been filed by [Defendant] or in a court with jurisdiction.”

* After examining the briefs and appellate record, this panel has determined unanimously that oral argument would not materially assist in the determination of this appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2); 10th Cir. R. 34.1(G). The case is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument. This order and judgment is not binding precedent, except under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, and collateral estoppel. It may be cited, however, for its persuasive value consistent with Fed. R. App. P. 32.1 and 10th Cir. R. 32.1. Appellate Case: 25-1002 Document: 12-1 Date Filed: 03/31/2025 Page: 2

The District of Colorado dismissed her case without prejudice because she both

repeatedly failed to file her complaint in a court-approved form and refused to either pay

the relevant filing and administrative fees or submit a court-approved in forma pauperis

motion. It did so under the District of Colorado’s Local Rule 5.1(c), which said that “[i]f

not filed electronically, an unrepresented prisoner or party shall use the procedures,

forms, and instructions posted on the court’s website[.]” D. Colo. Civ. R. 5.1(c).

We review the district court’s dismissal under its local rules for an abuse of

discretion. Murray v. Archambo, 132 F.3d 609, 610 (10th Cir. 1998) (citing Miller v.

Department of Treasury, 934 F.2d 1161, 1162 (10th Cir. 1991)). Plaintiff does not

respond to the reasons underlying the district court’s dismissal in her appellate brief,

focusing instead on her substantive claims. She has therefore failed to show the district

court erred in dismissing her case. And as we have held, district courts can appropriately

dismiss cases when parties have “repeatedly failed to comply with the court’s orders,

despite many opportunities to do so, and despite being specifically referred to the court-

approved complaint form.” Pierre v. Aurora Loan Servs., LLC, 602 F. App’x 410, 413

(10th Cir. 2015); see also Georgacarakos v. Watts, 368 F. App’x 917, 918–19 (10th Cir.

2010). Nothing in this case warrants departing from this rule.1

1 Plaintiff also moved for leave to proceed in forma pauperis and for a default judgment against Defendant. ECF Nos. 9, 10. We deny both motions. 2 Appellate Case: 25-1002 Document: 12-1 Date Filed: 03/31/2025 Page: 3

AFFIRMED.

Entered for the Court

Joel M. Carson III Circuit Judge

3