James v. Scott

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED October 21, 2008 No. 08-10066

Conference Calendar Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk TERRY JAMES

Plaintiff-Appellant v.

KATRENA SCOTT

Defendant-Appellee

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas USDC No. 3:07-CV-419

Before KING, BARKSDALE, and OWEN, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Terry James appeals the district court’s dismissal of his 42 U.S.C. § 1981 action for failure to state a claim. James has filed a motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis (IFP) on appeal, challenging the district court’s denial of IFP and certification that his appeal would not be taken in good faith. See Baugh v. Taylor, 117 F.3d 197, 202 (5th Cir. 1997); 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3); FED. R. APP. P. 24(a)(3). James argues that defendant Katrena Scott’s denial of his insurance claim was based on discriminatory intent.

No. 08-10066

James has not shown that the district court erred in determining that he had not alleged sufficient facts to show that Scott acted with discriminatory intent in denying his insurance claim. See Green v. State Bar of Tex., 27 F.3d 1083, 1086 (5th Cir. 1994). James is not entitled to relief because his pleading “requires more than labels and conclusions, and . . . [f]actual allegations must be enough to raise a right to relief above the speculative level on the assumption that all the allegations in the complaint are true (even if doubtful in fact).” Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 127 S. Ct. 1955, 1965 (2007) (citation omitted). This appeal is without arguable merit and is thus frivolous. See Howard v. King, 707 F.2d 215, 220 (5th Cir. 1983). Accordingly, James’s IFP motion is DENIED and the appeal is DISMISSED. See Baugh, 117 F.3d at 202 & n.24; 5TH CIR. R. 42.2.