Court Opinion

ID: 9949187
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2024-03-09 01:00:24.700638+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T14:28:47.773206
License: Public Domain

Case: 23-50912            Document: 32-1         Page: 1      Date Filed: 03/08/2024

           United States Court of Appeals
                for the Fifth Circuit
                                   ____________
                                                                             United States Court of Appeals
                                                                                      Fifth Circuit
                                    No. 23-50912
                                  Summary Calendar                                  FILED
                                  ____________                                  March 8, 2024
                                                                               Lyle W. Cayce
Lonnie Kade Welsh,                                                                  Clerk

                                                                  Plaintiff—Appellant,

                                          versus

Marsha McLane; Chris Greenwalt,

                                            Defendants—Appellees.
                   ______________________________

                   Appeal from the United States District Court
                        for the Western District of Texas
                             USDC No. 1:23-CV-890
                   ______________________________

Before Smith, Southwick, and Wilson, Circuit Judges.
Per Curiam: *
       Lonnie Welsh, formerly Texas prisoner #2201624, filed a pro se
42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint that was dismissed without prejudice as malici-
ous, per 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i), because Welsh had duplicate litigation
pending in the Northern District of Texas. Welsh moves to proceed in forma
pauperis (“IFP”) on appeal, which constitutes a challenge to the district
court’s certification that any appeal would not be taken in good faith because
       _____________________
       *
           This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5.
Case: 23-50912       Document: 32-1       Page: 2    Date Filed: 03/08/2024

                                 No. 23-50912

Welsh will not present a nonfrivolous appellate issue. See Baugh v. Taylor,
117 F.3d 197, 202 (5th Cir. 1997).
       Welsh does not challenge the determination that he had duplicate
litigation pending when he initially filed the instant complaint. Rather, he
contends that his voluntary dismissal of duplicate litigation in the Northern
District constitutes new evidence that warranted the grant of his Federal
Rule of Civil Procedure 59(e) motion and reinstatement of his complaint.
       But, as noted by the district court, Welsh waited two weeks after entry
of the judgment dismissing the instant complaint as malicious to move to
dismiss his duplicate litigation in the Northern District. Therefore, Welsh
has failed to show that, at the time the district court dismissed his complaint
as malicious, it made a manifest error of law or fact. See Templet v. Hydro-
Chem, Inc., 367 F.3d 473, 478–79 (5th Cir. 2004). Accordingly, Welsh fails
to show that the district court abused its discretion in dismissing his com-
plaint as malicious under § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i) or in denying his Rule 59(e)
motion. See Shakouri v. Davis, 923 F.3d 407, 410 (5th Cir. 2019); Templet,
367 F.3d at 480.
       The appeal is without arguable merit and is thus frivolous. See Howard
v. King, 707 F.2d 215, 220 (5th Cir. 1983). Accordingly, the motion to pro-
ceed IFP on appeal is DENIED, and the appeal is DISMISSED. See
Baugh, 117 F.3d at 202 n.24; 5th Cir. R. 42.2.
       We warned Welsh that he would face sanctions if he continued to file
frivolous or repetitive pleadings. We also directed him to review all pending
matters and to move to dismiss any that are frivolous, repetitive, or otherwise
abusive. See Welsh v. Abbott, No. 23-50492, 2023 WL 8804578, *1 (5th Cir.
Dec. 20, 2023) (unpublished); Welsh v. McLane, No. 20-10412, 2021 WL
5313626, *1-2 (5th Cir. Nov. 15, 2021) (unpublished). Because Welsh has
ignored our warnings, IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that a

                                      2
Case: 23-50912        Document: 32-1       Page: 3    Date Filed: 03/08/2024

                                 No. 23-50912

SANCTION IS IMPOSED. Welsh is ORDERED to remit a sanction
in the amount of $100, payable to the clerk of this court. Welsh is also
BARRED from filing any pleading in this court, or in any court subject to
this court’s jurisdiction, until that sanction is paid in full, unless he first
obtains leave of the court in which he seeks to file such pleading. Welsh is
further CAUTIONED that any future frivolous or repetitive filings in this
court, or any court subject to this court’s jurisdiction, will subject him to
additional sanctions. He is again DIRECTED to review all pending matters
and to move to dismiss any that are frivolous, repetitive, or otherwise abusive.

                                       3