UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

Case No. 22-cv-23646-BLOOM

MATTHEW ALEXANDER MCGOWAN, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

LAUREN DAWSON ET. AL., 

Defendants.

_______________________________________/ 

ORDER ON MOTION FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL IN FORMA PAUPERIS

THIS CAUSE is before the Court upon Plaintiff Matthew Alexander McGowan’s

Application to Proceed Without Prepayment of Fees and Affidavit, ECF No. [9] (“Application”), 

filed on January 23, 2023. Because the Court has dismissed this case and Plaintiff has filed a Notice 

of Appeal, ECF No. [6], the Court construes Plaintiff’s Application to be a Motion for Leave to 

Appeal In Forma Pauperis. The Court has carefully reviewed the Application, the record in this 

case, the applicable law, and is otherwise fully advised. For the reasons set forth below, the 

Application is denied. 

“Applications to appeal in forma pauperis are governed by 28 U.S.C. § 1915 and Federal

Rule of Appellate Procedure 24.” Woodson v. Sec’y Dep’t of Corr., No. 02-21921-Civ, 2020 WL 

5819808, at *2 (S.D. Fla. Sept. 29, 2020). “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). “A party 

demonstrates good faith by seeking appellate review of any issue that is not frivolous when 

examined under an objective standard.” Ghee v. Retailers Nat’l Bank, 271 F. App’x 858, 859 (11th 

Cir. 2008). “An appeal filed in forma pauperis is frivolous when it appears the plaintiff has little 

or no chance of success, meaning that the factual allegations are clearly baseless or that the legal 

Case 1:22-cv-23646-BB Document 10 Entered on FLSD Docket 01/27/2023 Page 1 of 3
Case No. 22-cv-23646-BLOOM

2

theories are indisputably meritless.” Daniels v. Florida, No. 19-62464-Civ, 2019 WL 8888208, at 

*1 (S.D. Fla. Dec. 5, 2019) (quotation marks omitted).

On November 7, 2022, Plaintiff initiated this case with a Complaint filed under 42 U.S.C. 

§ 1985(3), alleging that two public defenders, two judges, two prosecutors, and two members of 

the Florida Bar’s Attorney/Consumer Assistance Program had conspired against Plaintiff to violate 

six of his civil rights. See generally ECF No. [1]. On November 15, 2022, the Court dismissed 

Plaintiff’s Complaint as a shotgun pleading. ECF No. [3]. On December 13, 2022, Plaintiff filed 

an Amended Complaint, expanding on the allegations within his original Complaint, and asserting 

that “The Florida Bar and the Eleventh Circuit Judicial Court have worked together to ensure that 

the [Plaintiff] has no rights[.]” ECF No. [4] at 19. On December 15, 2022, the Court dismissed 

Plaintiff’s Amended Complaint as another “rambling, largely incomprehensible shotgun pleading 

that fails ‘to give the defendants adequate notice of the claims against them and the grounds upon 

which each claim rests.’” ECF No. [5] at 1-2 (quoting Weiland v. Palm Beach Cnty. Sheriff’s Off., 

792 F.3d 1313, 1323 (11th Cir. 2015)).

The Court concludes that Plaintiff has failed to seek appellate review “of any issue that is 

not frivolous when examined under an objective standard.” Ghee, 271 F. App’x at 859. In his 

Notice of Appeal, Plaintiff explains that he is appealing due to the undersigned’s Judge’s alleged 

participation in the conspiracy to deprive him of his rights. ECF No. [6]. That factual allegation is 

“clearly baseless” and the Court concludes that Plaintiff has “no chance of success” in his appeal 

of the Court’s dismissal of his Amended Complaint. Daniels, 2019 WL 8888208 at *1. The Court 

therefore finds Plaintiff’s appeal to be frivolous and “certifies in writing that it is not taken in good 

faith.” 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3).

Accordingly, it is ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the Application, ECF No. [9], is 

Case 1:22-cv-23646-BB Document 10 Entered on FLSD Docket 01/27/2023 Page 2 of 3
Case No. 22-cv-23646-BLOOM

3

DENIED.

DONE AND ORDERED in Chambers at Miami, Florida, on January 26, 2023.

_________________________________

BETH BLOOM

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Copies to:

Counsel of Record

Matthew Alexander McGowan

200135126

Miami-Dade County-MW

Metro West

Inmate Mail/Parcels

13850 NW 41st Street

Miami, FL 33178

PRO SE

Case 1:22-cv-23646-BB Document 10 Entered on FLSD Docket 01/27/2023 Page 3 of 3