Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-casd-3_13-cv-00973/USCOURTS-casd-3_13-cv-00973-23/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 550
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Civil Rights (U.S. defendant)
Cause of Action: 42:1983pr Prisoner Civil Rights

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

BRANDON MEEKS,

Plaintiff,

CASE NO. 13cv973-GPC(BGS)

ORDER RE NOTICE OF

vs. REFERRAL

A. NUNEZ, et al.,

Defendant.

On March 8, 2017, the Court granted Defendants’ motion for terminating

sanctions and denied Plaintiff’s motion to suppress his deposition. (Dkt. No. 237.) 

On March 17, 2017, Plaintiff filed a notice of appeal. (Dkt. No. 239.) On March 22,

2017, the United States Court of Appeal for the Ninth Circuit referred the issue of

whether in forma pauperis status should continue for the appeal or whether the appeal

is frivolous or taken in bad faith. (Dkt. No. 245.) 

“An appeal may not be taken in forma pauperis if the trial court certifies in

writing that it is not taken in good faith.” 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3). Federal Rule of

Appellate Procedure 24(a)(3) provides that

a party who was permitted to proceed in forma pauperis in the districtcourt action, or who was determined to be financially unable to obtain an

adequate defense in a criminal case, to proceed on appeal in forma

pauperis without further authorization, unless: (A) the district court--

before or after the notice of appeal is filed--certifies that the appeal is not

taken in good faith or finds that the party is not otherwise entitled to

proceed in forma pauperis and states in writing its reasons for the

certification or finding; or (B) a statute provides otherwise. 

- 1 - [13cv973-GPC(BGS)]

Case 3:13-cv-00973-GPC-BGS Document 248 Filed 04/06/17 PageID.<pageID> Page 1 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

Fed. R. App. P. 24(a)(3). A good faith inquiry does not require a preliminary showing

of any particular degree of merit. Ellis v. U.S., 356 U.S. 674, 674 (1958). In the

absence of an improper motive, good faith is established by the presentation of any

issue which is not plainly frivolous. Id. An appeal is frivolous if it lacks any arguable

basis in law or fact. Neitzke v. Williams, 490 U.S. 319, 325 (1989). 

In the Court’s order of dismissal, after consideration of the five factor test that

a court must consider before dismissing an action as a sanction, it concluded that

despite warnings and explanations to Plaintiff why his objections to the taking of his

deposition had no merit, Plaintiff violated Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 37 for

failing to appear and testify at his deposition and failure to comply with court orders. 

Thus, it concludes that the appeal lacks any arguable basis in law or fact and is

frivolous. Accordingly, it is HEREBY ORDERED that: (1) Plaintiff’s in forma

pauperis status is REVOKED for purposes of the appeal; and (2) the Clerk of Court is

DIRECTED to notify the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals that the Court certifies that

Plaintiff’s appeal is frivolous. 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

DATED: April 6, 2017

HON. GONZALO P. CURIEL

United States District Judge

- 2 - [13cv973-GPC(BGS)]

Case 3:13-cv-00973-GPC-BGS Document 248 Filed 04/06/17 PageID.<pageID> Page 2 of 2