Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Jose Leon GONZALEZ-LONGORIA, also known as Alfred Martinez, also known as Juan Vela, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2009-04-15
Citations: 323 F. App'x 309
Docket Number: No. 08-50848
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Jose Leon GONZALEZ-LONGORIA, also known as Alfred Martinez, also known as Juan Vela, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before JOLLY, BENAVIDES, and HAYNES, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 323
Pages: 309–310

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Jose Leon GONZALEZ-LONGORIA, also known as Alfred Martinez, also known as Juan Vela, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 08-50848
Summary Calendar.
United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
April 15, 2009.
Joseph H. Gay, Jr., Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office Western District of Texas, San Antonio, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Jose Leon Gonzalez-Longoria, Pollock, LA, pro se.
Before JOLLY, BENAVIDES, and HAYNES, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Jose Leon Gonzalez-Longoria, Jr., federal prisoner #59761-079, seeks leave to proceed in forma pauperis (IFP) to appeal the denial for lack of jurisdiction of his motion to show cause why the Government had not filed a motion under 18 U.S.C. § 3573 for remission of his $200,000 fine. The district court denied IFP and certified that Gonzalez^-Longoria's appeal was not taken in good faith. By moving for leave to proceed IFP, Gonzalez-Longoria is challenging the district court's certification. See Baugh v. Taylor, 117 F.3d 197, 202 (5th Cir.1997); Fed. R.App. P. 24(a)(5).
On appeal, Gonzalez-Longoria does not addresses the threshold issue of whether the district court had jurisdiction to consider his motion to show cause. Gonzalez-Longoria's motion to show cause was an unauthorized motion that the district court was without jurisdiction to entertain. See United States v. Early, 27 F.3d 140, 142 (5th Cir.1994). Gonzalez-Longoria's appeal is from the denial of that unauthorized motion.
'Gonzalez-Longoria's appeal does not involve legal points arguable on their merits, and it is therefore frivolous. See Howard v. King, 707 F.2d 215, 220 (5th Cir.1983). Accordingly, Gonzalez-Longoria's IFP motion is DENIED, and the appeal is DISMISSED as frivolous. See Baugh, 117 F.3d at 202; 5th Cm. R. 42.2.
Pursuant to 5th Cut. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under die limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.