Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca10-10-04100/USCOURTS-ca10-10-04100-0/pdf.json

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

---

FILED

United States Court of Appeals

Tenth Circuit

July 12, 2010

Elisabeth A. Shumaker

Clerk of Court

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT

JOHN ROBERT DEMOS, JR.,

Plaintiff ! Appellant,

v.

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Defendant ! Appellee.

 

 No. 10-4100

 (D.C. No. 2:10-CV-00285-DAK)

 

ORDER

Plaintiff John Robert Demos, proceeding pro se, seeks to appeal the district court’s

May 10, 2010 Order dismissing his complaint based on failure to pay the entire filing fee. 

Plaintiff Demos is under filing restrictions in this circuit. See Demos v. Keating, 33

F. App’x 918 (10th Cir. Jan. 30, 2002). As a result of these restrictions, he can not proceed

pro se in this court unless he first obtains leave to do so. Moreover, the filing restrictions

imposed by 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g) are applicable to Plaintiff Demos because, prior to filing this

appeal, he has accumulated at least three or more civil actions, while incarcerated or

detained, that were dismissed as frivolous, malicious, or for failure to state a claim.

In a June 4, 2010 Order, this court directed Plaintiff Demos to follow the required

procedures set forth in Demos v. Keating for obtaining leave to proceed pro se and to show

Appellate Case: 10-4100 Document: 01018455362 Date Filed: 07/12/2010 Page: 1
2

cause why this appeal should not be dismissed for failure to prepay the entire filing fee. The

June 4, 2010 Order warned Plaintiff that failure to fully comply in any way with the filingrestriction requirements would result in dismissal of this appeal without further notice. 

In response to the June 4, 2010 Order, Plaintiff Demos submitted a document entitled

“notice of appeal, or in the alternative, a request for a certificate of appealability . . . request

to proceed pro se,” which the court has construed as a petition for leave to proceed pro se.

This petition, however, is not in compliance with the court’s 2002 order imposing filing

restrictions. 

Accordingly, the appeal is DISMISSED for failure to prosecute. See 10th Cir. R.

42.1. The mandate shall issue forthwith.

Entered for the Court,

ELISABETH A. SHUMAKER, Clerk

Appellate Case: 10-4100 Document: 01018455362 Date Filed: 07/12/2010 Page: 2