United States Court of Appeals

for the Fifth Circuit

No. 20-11074

Summary Calendar

In the Matter of: William Paul Burch

Debtor,

William Paul Burch, 

Appellant,

versus

America’s Servicing Company, 

Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Texas

USDC No. 4:20-CV-1048

Before Stewart, Haynes, and Ho, Circuit Judges.

Per Curiam:*

* Pursuant to 5th Circuit Rule 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opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited 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 Circuit Rule 47.5.4.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

November 12, 2021

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

Case: 20-11074 Document: 00516091095 Page: 1 Date Filed: 11/12/2021
No. 20-11074

2

William Paul Burch appeals the district court’s dismissal for failure to 

pay the filing fee for his appeal in the district court of a judgment of the 

bankruptcy court for the Northern District of Texas. Burch has filed a 

motion to remand this matter to the district court, stating that he is now able 

to pay the filing fee. Because the record does not establish that the district 

court issued a statement or indicative ruling in accordance with Federal Rule 

of Civil Procedure 62.1 and Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 12.1, upon 

which Burch relies, Burch’s motion for remand is not well taken and is thus 

denied. See Fed. R. App. P. 12.1; Fed. R. Civ. P. 62.1; cf. Moore v. 

Tangipahoa Par. Sch. Bd., 836 F.3d 503, 504 (5th Cir. 2016). Burch’s motion 

to file an out of time reply to the opposition to remand is likewise denied.

The motion for remand additionally acknowledges that Burch does 

not currently meet the financial eligibility requirements to proceed IFP in this 

appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 24(a); 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(1); Carson v. Polley, 

689 F.2d 562, 586 (5th Cir. 1982); see also Burch v. Freedom Mortg. Corp. (In 

re Burch), 835 F. App’x 741, 749 (5th Cir. 2021), cert. denied, 2021 WL 

4508733 (U.S. Oct. 4, 2021) (No. 21-5069). Moreover, Burch does not 

challenge the district court’s determination that he failed to pay the filing fee 

in that court, which was the only ruling Burch has appealed. Burch therefore 

fails show a nonfrivolous issue for appeal or financial eligibility to proceed 

IFP; accordingly, the motion to proceed IFP is denied and the appeal is 

dismissed as frivolous. See 5th Cir. R. 42.2; § 1915.

Burch was previously warned that if he continued to file frivolous 

appeals and motions in this court, this court would issue sanctions, and he 

was warned to withdraw any pending frivolous appeals. Burch v. Freedom 

Mortg. Corp., 850 F. App’x 292, 294 (5th Cir. 2021); Burch, 835 F. App’x at 

749. Because this court has previously warned of sanctions and the instant

appeal is frivolous, we determine that sanctions are warranted. See Coghlan 

v. Starkey, 852 F.2d 806, 808 (5th Cir. 1988). Burch is hereby ordered to pay 

Case: 20-11074 Document: 00516091095 Page: 2 Date Filed: 11/12/2021
No. 20-11074

3

$100.00 to the clerk of this court. The clerk of this court and the clerks of all 

courts subject to the jurisdiction of this court are directed to return to Burch 

unfiled any submissions he should make until the sanction is paid in full. 

Burch is again warned that additional frivolous or abusive filings in this court, 

the district court, or the bankruptcy court will result in the imposition of 

further sanctions. He is again admonished to review any pending appeals and 

to withdraw any appeals that are frivolous.

MOTIONS DENIED; APPEAL DISMISSED AS 

FRIVOLOUS; SANCTION IMPOSED; ADDITIONAL 

SANCTION WARNING ISSUED.

Case: 20-11074 Document: 00516091095 Page: 3 Date Filed: 11/12/2021