Henry v. Jean-Louis

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

Henry v. Jean-Louis

Opinion

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 96-11070

Summary Calendar

RONALD CRAIG HENRY,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

VERSUS

H. JEAN-LOUIS, Dr.; SHAFFER, Dr.; RONALD DREWRY, Warden, LOONEY, Major,

Defendants-Appellees. __________________________________

No. 97-10344

Summary Calendar ___________________________________

RONALD CRAIG HENRY,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

VERSUS

H. JEAN-LOUIS, DR., ET AL.,

Defendants,

H. JEAN-LOUIS, DR.,; SHAFFER, DR.,

Defendants-Appellees.

Appeals from the United States District Court For the Northern District of Texas

1 (1:96-CV-59-BA & 1:96-CV-59-C) July 2, 1997

Before JONES, DeMOSS and PARKER, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:*

Ronald Craig Henry, Texas state prisoner # 694744 requests

consolidation of appeals and permission to proceed in forma

pauperis (IFP) in the appeals arising out of the denial of his

42 U.S.C. § 1983

lawsuit.

The district court dismissed a portion of the original suit

based on immunity of the defendants and Henry timely appealed.

Subsequently, the district court granted summary judgment on the

remaining claims and Henry appealed that ruling as well.

It is ORDERED that the motion of appellant to consolidate case

number 97-10344 with case number 96-11070 is GRANTED.

On January 14, 1997, this court held Henry’s appeal in

abeyance for 30 days pending payment of the $105 filing fee or

submittal of the required documents pursuant to the Prison

Litigation Reform Act of 1995 (PLRA). Henry timely responded;

however, the documentation submitted by Henry covered the wrong

six-month period (July 1996 through December 1996). The correct

six-month period is February 1996 through July 1996 because Henry’s

notice of appeal was filed on August 23, 1996. See § 1915(a)(b).

* 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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.

2 Therefore, Henry’s motion for leave to proceed IFP on appeal

is DENIED, and his appeal is DISMISSED for want of prosecution.

See 5th Cir. R. 42.3. Should Henry wish to reinstate his appeal,

he is instructed to pay the $105 filing fee to the clerk of the

district court or to submit the appropriate trust fund

documentation within 30 days from the date of this order.

MOTION FOR IFP DENIED. APPEAL DISMISSED.

3

Reference

Status
Unpublished