Floyd Thomas Rogers and his wife, Dykeba Lecole Rogers, filed the instant suit on behalf of themselves and their three minor children to seek redress for their alleged personal injuries as well as purported violations of their civil and constitutional rights. The district court dismissed the suit for want of prosecution and denied their request to proceed in forma pauperis (IFP) on appeal. The appellants now move this court for authorization to proceed IFP on appeal.

The motion for authorization to proceed IFP is GRANTED. See Howard v. King, 707 F.2d 215, 220 (5th Cir. 1983); Carson v. Polley, 689 F.2d 562, 586 (5th Cir. 1982). Nevertheless, the appellants have not shown that the district court abused its discretion in dismissing their suit for want of prosecution. See Liteky v. United States, 510 U.S. 540, 554-55, 114 S.Ct. 1147, 127 L.Ed.2d 474 (1994); Matassarin v. Lynch, 174 F.3d 549, 571 (5th Cir. 1999). Consequently, the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.