Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca10-09-03371/USCOURTS-ca10-09-03371-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 440
Nature of Suit: Other Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 

---

*

After examining appellant’s brief and the appellate record, this panel has

determined unanimously that oral argument would not materially assist the

determination of this appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2) and 10th Cir. R.

34.1(G). The case is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument. This

order and judgment is not binding precedent except under the doctrines of law of

the case, res judicata and collateral estoppel. It may be cited, however, for its

persuasive value consistent with Fed. R. App. P. 32.1 and 10th Cir. R. 32.1.

FILED

United States Court of Appeals

Tenth Circuit

April 14, 2010

Elisabeth A. Shumaker

Clerk of Court

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

TENTH CIRCUIT

STEWART A. WEBB,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

v.

KATHRYN H. VRATIL, in her

official capacity of Chief Judge for the

United States District Court for the

District of Kansas; and UNITED

STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR

THE DISTRICT OF KANSAS,

Defendants-Appellees.

No. 09-3371

(D.C. No. 2:09-CV-2603-FJG)

(D. Kan.)

ORDER AND JUDGMENT*

Before MURPHY, GORSUCH, and HOLMES, Circuit Judges.

Stewart A. Webb filed suit against the United States District Court for the

District of Kansas, and against Kathryn Vratil, in her official capacity as the

Chief Judge of that court. In a thorough six-page order, the district court denied

Appellate Case: 09-3371 Document: 01018402117 Date Filed: 04/14/2010 Page: 1 
- 2 -

Mr. Webb’s request to proceed in forma pauperis, concluding that the lawsuit was

legally frivolous. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i). Accordingly, the district

court dismissed the case without prejudice to the filing of a pre-paid complaint.

Mr. Webb appeals this decision and seeks permission to proceed on appeal

in forma pauperis. For substantially the same reasons set out by the district court

in its order, this court concludes that this appeal is frivolous or malicious. See

also Price v. Vratil, No. 09-3172, 2010 WL 558555, at *1 (10th Cir. Feb. 18,

2010) (unpublished) (reaching same result in similar appeal with similar

complaint). Accordingly, we hereby dismiss this appeal and deny the request to

proceed in forma pauperis on appeal. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i) (“[T]he

court shall dismiss the case at any time if the court determines . . . the . . . appeal

is frivolous or malicious.”). 

ENTERED FOR THE COURT

Neil M. Gorsuch

Circuit Judge

Appellate Case: 09-3371 Document: 01018402117 Date Filed: 04/14/2010 Page: 2