Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca5-19-30434/USCOURTS-ca5-19-30434-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Peake BMW of New Orleans
Appellee
The King/Morocco
Appellant

Document Text:

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 19-30434

Summary Calendar

THE KING/MOROCCO,

Plaintiff-Appellant

v.

PEAKE BMW OF NEW ORLEANS, Inter-Alia,

Defendant-Appellee

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Eastern District of Louisiana

USDC No. 2:18-CV-9004

Before JONES, HIGGINSON, and OLDHAM, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

The King/Morocco moves for leave to proceed in forma pauperis (IFP) in 

this appeal. By moving this court for leave to proceed IFP, The King/Morocco

is challenging the district court’s determination that his appeal is not taken in 

good faith. Baugh v. Taylor, 117 F.3d 197, 202 (5th Cir. 1997).

“This court must examine the basis of its jurisdiction, on its own motion, 

if necessary.” Mosley v. Cozby, 813 F.2d 659, 660 (5th Cir. 1987). We do not 

* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not 

be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH 

CIR. R. 47.5.4.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

February 10, 2020

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

Case: 19-30434 Document: 00515303457 Page: 1 Date Filed: 02/10/2020
No. 19-30434

2

have jurisdiction to address The King/Morocco’s appeal of the magistrate 

judge’s order denying him IFP status. See Donaldson v. Ducote, 373 F.3d 622, 

624 (5th Cir. 2004); see also Colburn v. Bunge Towing, Inc., 883 F.2d 372, 379 

(5th Cir. 1989). In addition, an untimely notice of appeal in a civil case 

deprives this court of jurisdiction. Bowles v. Russell, 551 U.S. 205, 213-14

(2007). Because he did not file a timely notice of appeal from the district court’s 

order denying his motion for an appeal to the district court, this court also lacks 

jurisdiction over that portion of The King/Morocco’s appeal. See id.; FED.

R. APP. P. 4(a)(1)(A).

Accordingly, the appeal is DISMISSED for lack of jurisdiction. The IFP 

motion is DENIED as moot. King is WARNED that future frivolous, repetitive, 

or otherwise abusive filings will invite the imposition of sanctions, which may 

include dismissal, monetary sanctions, and restrictions on his ability to file 

pleadings in this court and any court subject to this court’s jurisdiction.

Case: 19-30434 Document: 00515303457 Page: 2 Date Filed: 02/10/2020