Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-casd-3_17-cv-01535/USCOURTS-casd-3_17-cv-01535-2/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 442
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights Employment
Cause of Action: 42:1983cv Civil Rights Act - Civil Action for Deprivation of Rights

---

– 1 – 17cv1535

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

CORNELIUS OLUSEYI 

OGUNSALU,

Plaintiff,

Case No. 17-cv-01535-BAS-MDD

ORDER RE: PLAINTIFF’S IN 

FORMA PAUPERIS STATUS

v.

SWEETWATER UNION HIGH 

SCHOOL DISTRICT, et al.,

Defendants.

On July 28, 2017, Plaintiff Cornelius Oluseyi Ogunsalu, who is proceeding 

pro se, commenced this action arising out of his prior employment with and 

subsequent termination by Sweetwater Union High School District (“SUHSD”). 

(ECF No. 1.) On November 21, 2017, the Court dismissed Ogunsalu’s claims with 

prejudice against SUHSD on the basis that SUHSD was immune from the claims 

under the Eleventh Amendment. (ECF No. 13.) The Court also dismissed with leave 

to amend Ogunsalu’s claims against Defendant Jennifer Carbuccia. (Id.) After

several failed attempts to file a proper amended complaint, the Court denied with 

prejudice Ogunsalu’s motion for leave to file first amended complaint, which alleged 

Case 3:17-cv-01535-BAS-MDD Document 33 Filed 04/02/18 PageID.<pageID> Page 1 of 3
– 2 – 17cv1535

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

additional claims against Carbuccia and additional defendants. (ECF No. 27.) 

Thereafter, Ogunsalu filed a timely notice of appeal of that Order and the clerk’s 

judgment in favor of the defendants. (Pl.’s Notice of Appeal, ECF No. 29, at 2.)

On March 22, 2018, the Ninth Circuit referred this matter to this Court for the 

limited purpose of determining whether in forma pauperis (“IFP”) status should 

continue for Ogunsalu’s appeal, or whether the appeal is frivolous or taken in bad 

faith. (ECF No. 32.) For the following reasons, the Court finds that Ogunsalu’s IFP 

status should continue.

An appeal is in “good faith” where it seeks review of any issue that is “nonfrivolous.” Hooker v. American Airlines, 302 F.3d 1091, 1092 (9th Cir. 2002); see 

also Huffman v. Boersen, 406 U.S. 337, 339 (1972) (“In the federal system, ‘good 

faith’ has ‘been defined as a requirement that an appeal present a non-frivolous 

question for review.’”) (quoting Cruz v. Hauck, 404 U.S. 59, 62 (1971) (Douglas, J., 

concurring)). In turn, an issue is frivolous if it has “no arguable basis in fact or law.” 

O’Loughlin v. Doe, 920 F.2d 614, 617 (9th Cir. 1990).

Here, the Court found that Ogunsalu sought leave to amend his complaint to 

allege Title VII and ADEA discrimination claims identical to the claims previously 

dismissed without leave to amend by the Court. (ECF No. 27 at 4-5.) The Court found 

that amending the complaint to add these claims against individual SUHSD 

employees would be futile because, in part, there is no liability for individuals under 

Title VII or the ADEA. (Id.) Ogunsalu also failed to cure the deficiencies outlined in 

the Court’s previous orders regarding the claims against Carbuccia. (Id. at 5-7.)

Lastly, Ogunsalu sought to add claims under a criminal statute that provides no 

private right of action. (Id. at 7.) Though the Court denied with prejudice Ogunsalu’s

motion for leave to file a first amended complaint, given Ogunsalu’s pro se status, 

this Court concludes that there is an “arguable basis in fact or law” in Ogunsalu’s

appeal. Therefore, the Court finds that the appeal is taken in good faith and is nonfrivolous, and Ogunsalu’s IFP status should continue. See Hooker, 302 F.3d at 1092. 

Case 3:17-cv-01535-BAS-MDD Document 33 Filed 04/02/18 PageID.<pageID> Page 2 of 3
– 3 – 17cv1535

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

In accordance with the Ninth Circuit’s referral notice, the Clerk of the Court 

shall notify the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals and the parties of this order. (ECF 

No. 32.) 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: April 2, 2018

Case 3:17-cv-01535-BAS-MDD Document 33 Filed 04/02/18 PageID.<pageID> Page 3 of 3