Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-arwd-5_06-cv-05142/USCOURTS-arwd-5_06-cv-05142-4/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 555
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Prison Condition
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Prisoner Civil Rights

---

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS

FAYETTEVILLE DIVISION

DAVID DANIELS PLAINTIFF

v. Civil No. 06-5142

JUDGE TOM KEITH DEFENDANT

O R D E R

Now on this 25th day of June, 2007, the above referenced

matter comes on for consideration of the Magistrate Judge's

Report and Recommendation (document #17, filed May 23, 2007), and

the plaintiff’s Motion to Reopen Case for Appeal (document #18,

filed June 15, 2007). The Court, being well and sufficiently

advised, finds and orders as follows: 

1. The Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation

(document #17) recommends the denial of both plaintiff’s

Application to Proceed Without Prepayment of Fees (document #15)

and plaintiff’s Motion for Extension (document #17) of time for

appeal. In his report and recommendation, the Magistrate Judge

reasons that the plaintiff has not met the requirements for an

extension of the appeal time (See Fed. R. App. Pro. 4(a)(5)-(6))

and that the motion to appeal IFP should be denied because the

appeal is not timely and is therefore not taken in good faith. 

28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3). There have been no objections to the

report and recommendation. However, in a pleading filed June 15,

2007, the plaintiff again moved to reopen his case for appeal. 

(document #18). 

Case 5:06-cv-05142-JLH Document 19 Filed 06/25/07 Page 1 of 2 PageID #: <pageID>
2. The Court finds that, as stated in the report and

recommendation, the plaintiff has failed to meet the requirements

for an extension of the appeal time. Although the plaintiff

argues that he did not receive his legal mail in a timely

fashion, there is no proof that upon receipt of the January 3,

2007 Order dismissing his case the plaintiff moved to extend his

appeal time within the time frame required by Rule 4(a)(6)(B) of

the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure. 

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the Magistrate Judge's Report

and Recommendation is adopted in toto, and that, for the reasons

stated in the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation, the

motion for extension of time to appeal is hereby denied; the

motion to appeal IFP is denied as the appeal is untimely and

therefore not taken in good faith, 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3). 

IT IS, FURTHER, ORDERED that the plaintiff’s Motion to

Reopen Case for Appeal (document #18) should be, and it hereby

is, denied.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

/s/Jimm Larry Hendren

HON. JIMM LARRY HENDREN

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 5:06-cv-05142-JLH Document 19 Filed 06/25/07 Page 2 of 2 PageID #: <pageID>