Newman v. Brock
Newman v. Brock
Opinion
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 00-40959 Conference Calendar
ERNEST D. NEWMAN,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
versus
ROBERT A. BROCK, Doctor, Michael Unit; KENNETH W. BOWN, Doctor, Michael Unit; ANDREA J. MARTIN, R.N., Director of Nurses,
Defendants-Appellees.
-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas USDC No. 6:00-CV-139 -------------------- February 14, 2001
Before SMITH, BARKSDALE, and EMILIO M. GARZA, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Ernest D. Newman appeals the district court’s dismissal
without prejudice of his
42 U.S.C. § 1983complaint for failure
to exhaust administrative remedies. Newman has failed to brief
this issue, as he has provided neither argument nor authorities
to show that the district court erred in dismissing his suit.
See Yohey v. Collins,
985 F.2d 222, 225(5th Cir. 1993); Fed.
R. App. P. 28(a)(9). Accordingly, this appeal is dismissed as
frivolous.
* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4. No. 00-40959 -2-
This dismissal of a frivolous appeal constitutes one strike
against Newman for purposes of
28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). See Adepegba
v. Hammons,
103 F.3d 383, 388(5th Cir. 1996). If two other
district court actions or appeals filed by Newman are dismissed
as frivolous, he will be barred from bringing a civil action or
appeal as a prisoner proceeding in forma pauperis unless he is
under imminent danger of serious physical injury. See § 1915(g).
APPEAL DISMISSED AS FRIVOLOUS. 5th Cir. R. 42.2. SANCTIONS
WARNING ISSUED.
Reference
- Status
- Unpublished