Pursuant to 5 T H C IR . R. 47.5 , the court has determined that this opinion should not * be publishe d an d is not precedent except under the limited circu mstance s set forth in 5 T H C IR . R. 47.5 .4. 

### INTHE UNI TED S TATESCOU RT OFAPPEALS

FORTHE FIFTH CIRCU IT

N o. 08- 20347 Su m m ar y Cal endar TERRY L STUM P P l ai n t i f f

- A pp el l ee v. PA TR I CI A PO TTS D e fe nda nt - Appe l l ant

A pp ealf

rom t h e U n i t ed S t ates D i st ri ctC ou rt f or t h e S ou t h ern D i st ri ctof T exas U SD C N o. 4: 08- M C

- 208 B ef ore SM ITH , ST E W A R T , an d S O U T H W IC K , C i rcui tJu dg es. P E R C U R I A M: * P a tr ic ia P o tt s h a s file dam o tio n to p r o c e e din fo r m a p a u p e r i s ( “I F P ”) in ap pea l i n g t h e di st ri ctcourt ’ s den i alof her requ est s to proceed IFP in t h e di st ri ct court, f or app oi n t m en tof

coun sel , an d f

or r econsi derati on of her request f

or rem oval. Sh e i s al so app eal i n g t h e di st ri ctcourt ’ s or ders st ri king h er pl ead i n gs. P ot t s s ou gh tperm i ssi on t o rem ove a st ate c ou rtevi ct i on a ct i on fi l ed ag ai n sther to fe d e r a l d is tr ic t c o u r t. P o tt s a r g u e s th a t h e r la n d lo r d , T e r r y S tu m p , ra c ia lly di scr i m i n ated aga i n sther an d vi ol ated her r igh ts u n der t h e F ai r H ou si n g A ct United States Court of App eals

Fifth Circuit 

### F I L E D April17, 2009 Cha rl es R. F ulb ru g e II I ClerkN o. 08- 20347

2 an d the A m eri can s w i t h D i sabi l i t i es A ct . Sh e contends that Stum p’ s m ot ive f or doi n g so w as t o i m ped e her abil i t y t o l i t i gate c l ai m s agai n stt h e State of T exas. Am o v a n t s e e k in gle a v e to p r o c e e dIF P o n a p p e a l m u s t s h o w th a t s h e is a pa u p er a n dtha t t h e a p p ea li s tak en i n go od fa i th , i . e., the ap p ea lpr ese n ts n o n fr iv o lo u s is s u e s . S ee Carson v. Pol ley , 6 8 9 F .2d 5 6 2 , 5 8 6 (5 t h C ir. 1 9 8 2 ). P o tt s h a s s h o w n th a t sh e is e c o n o m ic a llye lig ib le to p r o c e e dIF P . A d k ins v . E . I. D u Pon tde Nem ou rs & Co. , 3 3 5 U .S . 3 3 1 , 3 3 9 (19 4 8 ). H ow eve r , Po t t s ha s no ts ho w n t hats he c an pr e s e nta no nf r ivo l o us i s s ue on app eal . Acivi lact i on f i l ed i n st ate c ou rtm ay be rem oved t o a federaldi st ri ct c o ur tt hatha s o r i gi nalj ur i s di c t i o n f o unde d o n ac l ai m a r i s i ng unde rt he C o n s tit u tio n o rla w s o f th e U n ite dS ta te s . 2 8 U .S .C . § 1 4 4 1 (b ) . H o w e v e r , a federalcourth a s o rig i n alor rem oval j u ri sdi ct i on onl y “ i f t h e federalqu est i on a p p e a r s o n t h e fa c e o f th e p la in tiff ’ s w e ll-p le a d e dco m p la in t a n dth e r e is gen eral l y n o federal j u ri sdi ct i on i f t h e pl ai n t i f f pl ead s onl y a st ate l aw cause of a cti on . ” MSO F Cor

p. v . Exxo n Cor

p. , 2 95 F . 3d 4 85, 4 90 ( 5th C i r. 2 002 ) . Iti s not suff i ci en tf or t h e federal qu est i on t o be rai sed i n t h e an sw er ori n t h e peti t i on f or r e m o v a l. I

d. The com pl ai n t fi l e d i n t he s t at e c o ur tw as as i m pl e s ui tt o e vi c ta r i s i ng u n d e rs ta te la w . S eeT EX . P ROP . C ODEA NN . § 24. 005 1. Th e com pl ai n tprovi ded n o b a s is fo rfe d e r a l q u e s tio n ju r is d ic tio n . T h e fa c t t h a t P o tt s b r o u g h t u p p o s s ib le fe d e r a l q u e s tio n cla im s in h e ra n s w e ra n dco u n te r c la im ca n n o t b e co n s id e r e din d e te r m in in gt h e e x is te n c e o f r e m o v a l ju r is d ic tio n . MS OF Co r p ., 295 F. 3d at490. Ther e f o r e , t he di s t r i c tc o ur tl ac ke d j u ri s di c t i o n t o a l l o w t he r e m o va lo f t he ac t i o n. I n l i ghto f

t he l ac k o f

fe de r alj ur i s di c t i o n, Po t t s c an no tr ai s e a ny n o n fr iv o lo u s is s u e s a r is in go u t o f th is ca s e . Se eCars on , 6 89 F . 2d at5 86 . The a p p e a l is th e r e fo r e d is m is s e d . S ee5 TH C IR . R . 42. 2. P o tt s is w a r n e dth a t a n yfu r th e rfilin go f r e p e tit io u s o rfr iv o lo u s a p p e a ls m ay r es ul ti n t he i m pos i ti on of s anct i ons agai nsther . These s anct i ons m ayN o. 08- 20347

3 in c lu d e d is m is s a l, m o n e ta r y s a n c tio n s , a n d r e s tr ic tio n s o n h e r a b ilit y t o file pl e ad i ngs i n t hi s c o ur ta nd a ny c o ur ts ubj e c tt o t hi s c o ur t ’ s j ur i s di c t i o n. P ot t s’ s m ot i on s for a p poi n t m en tof coun sel , f

or t h e i ssuan ce of

a w ri tof m a n d a m u s, an df

or h a b ea s corp u s reli ef are allde n i ed as m oo t. AP P EA L DI S M I S S ED ; AL L OUT S T AND I NG MOT I ONS A RE DE NI ED ; S ANC T I ON WARNI NG I S S UED .