UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT 

Deborah S. Hunt 

Clerk

100 EAST FIFTH STREET, ROOM 540 

POTTER STEWART U.S. COURTHOUSE 

CINCINNATI, OHIO 45202-3988 

Tel. (513) 564-7000 

www.ca6.uscourts.gov

 Filed: November 09, 2018 

 

Mr. Bryan Kanu 

2663 Wendee Drive 

Apartment 1919 

Cincinnati, OH 45238 

 Re: Case No. 18-3742, Bryan Kanu v. Siemens PLM Software, et al

Originating Case No. : 1:18-cv-00037 

Dear Mr. Kanu: 

 The Court issued the enclosed Order today in this case. 

 Sincerely yours, 

 

 

s/Amy E. Gigliotti 

Case Manager 

Direct Dial No. 513-564-7012 

cc: Mr. Richard W. Nagel 

Enclosure 

Case: 1:18-cv-00037-TSB-SKB Doc #: 18 Filed: 11/09/18 Page: 1 of 4 PAGEID #: 955 (1 of 4)
No. 18-3742 

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS 

FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT

BRYAN KANU, 

 Plaintiff-Appellant, 

v.

SIEMENS PLM SOFTWARE, et al.,

 Defendants-Appellees. 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

)

O R D E R 

 Bryan Kanu, proceeding pro se, appeals the dismissal of his employment discrimination 

suit filed pursuant to Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-2 and 5. The 

district court certified that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied Kanu 

permission to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3). Kanu now 

requests permission from this court to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 

24(a)(5). 

Kanu filed a motion to proceed in forma pauperis along with a 286-page complaint 

against Siemens PLM Software, the University of Cincinnati, and Cincinnati Children’s Hospital 

Medical Center. A magistrate judge concluded that Kanu’s motion did not support his request 

for pauper status and that his complaint was “facially deficient” and did “not comply with” 

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8. So, on January 29, 2018, the magistrate judge conditionally 

granted Kanu’s in forma pauperis motion and instructed him to either show cause why his pauper 

status should not be revoked and denied or “pay the full filing fee of $400.00” by February 5, 

2018. The magistrate judge also instructed Kanu to file an “amended complaint in compliance 

with Rule 8” by February 8, 2018. In a separate report and recommendation, the magistrate 

judge screened Kanu’s complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B) “[t]o the extent that [Kanu] 

Case: 1:18-cv-00037-TSB-SKB Doc #: 18 Filed: 11/09/18 Page: 2 of 4 PAGEID #: 956 (2 of 4)
No. 18-3742 

- 2 - 

has been conditionally granted leave to proceed in forma pauperis” and recommended that it “be 

dismissed sua sponte without prejudice to file a timely amended complaint that comports with 

Rule 8” and that the case be dismissed with prejudice “for failure to comply with the Court’s 

Order” if a timely amended complaint was not filed. Alternatively, assuming that Kanu’s in 

forma pauperis status was revoked, the magistrate judge screened Kanu’s complaint under Apple 

v. Glenn, 183 F.3d 477, 479 (6th Cir. 1999), and recommended that it be dismissed because its 

allegations were “so attenuated as to fail to state a claim that can be reasonably deciphered by the 

court or any defendant.”

 Kanu filed a response to the show-cause order and an amended complaint. He did not 

pay the full filing fee. In his amended complaint, Kanu asserted that he is an African American 

student. Kanu claimed that Siemens did not hire him for an international student employment 

position because of his race and “nation of origin, which is the United States of America.” Kanu 

claimed that Children’s Hospital discriminated against him by initially offering him $11 per 

hour—$4 per hour less than a fellow undergraduate student—for a student co-op employment 

position. Kanu explained that the resume he initially submitted to Children’s Hospital omitted 

his bachelor’s degree from Xavier University and that, after he submitted an updated resume to 

Children’s Hospital including that degree, he was offered $15.50 per hour. Kanu claimed that 

the University of Cincinnati denied him admission to its International Co-Op Program because of 

his race and national origin. He sought monetary and miscellaneous relief. 

On review of Kanu’s submissions, the magistrate judge filed a supplemental report on 

February 8, 2018, recommending that Kanu’s in forma pauperis status “be revoked based upon a 

lack of indigency,” that he “be required to immediately pay the full $400.00 filing fee for this 

case,” and that his complaint “be dismissed sua sponte with prejudice for failure to state any 

claim under Title VII or other federal law.” Kanu still did not pay the full filing fee. Over 

Kanu’s objections, the district court adopted the magistrate judge’s supplemental report and 

recommendation on July 31, 2018, revoked Kanu’s in forma pauperis status, and dismissed his 

Case: 1:18-cv-00037-TSB-SKB Doc #: 18 Filed: 11/09/18 Page: 3 of 4 PAGEID #: 957 (3 of 4)
No. 18-3742 

- 3 - 

amended complaint with prejudice. Kanu filed a timely appeal and a motion to proceed in forma 

pauperis on appeal. The district court denied Kanu leave to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal. 

 This court may grant a motion to proceed in forma pauperis if it determines that an appeal 

would be taken in good faith and the movant is indigent. See Owens v. Keeling, 461 F.3d 763, 

776 (6th Cir. 2006). A frivolous appeal, one that “lacks an arguable basis either in law or in 

fact,” would not be taken in good faith. Neitzke v. Williams, 490 U.S. 319, 325 (1989); see also 

Coppedge v. United States, 369 U.S. 438, 445 (1962). 

 There is no non-frivolous basis on which to appeal the district court’s dismissal of Kanu’s 

amended complaint. Once Kanu’s conditional in forma pauperis status was revoked, his 

amended complaint was not subject to screening under § 1915(e)(2), which “applies only to 

litigants who are proceeding” in forma pauperis. Apple, 183 F.3d at 479. Nevertheless, 

regardless of Kanu’s in forma pauperis status, his amended complaint was subject to dismissal 

under Apple. Under Apple, a complaint may be dismissed “at any time” when its allegations “are 

totally implausible, attenuated, unsubstantial, frivolous, devoid of merit, or no longer open to 

discussion.” Id. Kanu’s amended complaint met the Apple standard for dismissal. 

 The motion to proceed in forma pauperis is DENIED because an appeal in this case 

would be frivolous. See Neitzke, 490 U.S. at 325. Unless Kanu pays the $505 filing fee to the 

district court within thirty days of the entry of this order, this appeal will be dismissed for want 

of prosecution. 

 ENTERED BY ORDER OF THE COURT 

 Deborah S. Hunt, Clerk 

Case: 1:18-cv-00037-TSB-SKB Doc #: 18 Filed: 11/09/18 Page: 4 of 4 PAGEID #: 958 (4 of 4)