Court Opinion

ID: 9392767
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-05-06 00:00:46.543636+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:18:48.657869
License: Public Domain

Case: 22-50869   Document: 00516740520   Page: 1    Date Filed: 05/05/2023

          United States Court of Appeals
               for the Fifth Circuit
                           ____________                     United States Court of Appeals
                                                                     Fifth Circuit

                                                                   FILED
                            No. 22-50869                        May 5, 2023
                          Summary Calendar
                          ____________                        Lyle W. Cayce
                                                                   Clerk
   Patricia A. Grant, PH.D.,

                                                   Plaintiff—Appellant,

                                versus

   Texas State Attorney General Open Government
   Records, and Consumer Protection Division; Texas
   Health and Human Service Commission; Department of
   Aging and Disability Services, Office of the Long-Term
   Care Ombudsman Program Open Records Division;
   Patricia Ducayet; Theresa Thomson; Cynthia Boyum;
   Bexar County Area Agency on Aging, Ombudsman Program;
   Tx Department of Family Protective Services, Adult
   Protective Services; Sandra Martinez; Coryell County
   Memorial Hospital, also known as Coryell Health; David K.
   Byrom; Regent Management Services L.P.; Charles D.
   Milos, Jr.; Steven E. Conner; Regent Care Center of
   San Antonio II, L.P.; Regent Care General Partner
   Incorporated; Regent Care Operations General
   Partner Incorporated; Regent Care Center of San
   Antonio; Regent Care Center of Oakwell Farms, also
   known as Regent Care Center of San Antonio II Limited
   Partnership, also known as Regent Care Center of Oakwell
   Farms; Robert Kerr; Deborah Seabron; Stanley Grant;
   Harold Grant; Terry Luna; Bertha L. Franklin;
   Discoverable Others; Regent Care Center Oakwell
   Farms,
Case: 22-50869           Document: 00516740520             Page: 2      Date Filed: 05/05/2023

                                                 Defendants—Appellees.
                        ______________________________

                        Appeal from the United States District Court
                             for the Western District of Texas
                                  USDC No. 5:21-CV-761
                        ______________________________

   Before King, Jones, and Smith, Circuit Judges.
   Per Curiam: *
            Patricia A. Grant, proceeding pro se, moves for leave to proceed in
   forma pauperis (IFP) in this appeal of the sua sponte dismissal of her case.
   The motion is a challenge to the district court’s certification that the appeal
   is not taken in good faith. See Baugh v. Taylor, 117 F.3d 197, 202 (5th Cir.
   1997).
            Grant fails to address the district court’s reasons for the dismissal of
   her complaint as frivolous and malicious and for failure to state a claim. Pro
   se briefs are afforded liberal construction. See Yohey v. Collins, 985 F.2d 222,
   225 (5th Cir. 1993). Nevertheless, when an appellant fails to identify any
   error in the district court’s analysis, it is the same as if the appellant had not
   appealed the decision. Brinkmann v. Dallas Cnty. Deputy Sheriff Abner, 813
   F.2d 744, 748 (5th Cir. 1987).
            Because Grant has failed to challenge any factual or legal aspect of the
   district court’s disposition of her claims or the certification that her appeal is
   not taken in good faith, she has abandoned the critical issue of her appeal. See
   id. Thus, the appeal lacks arguable merit. See Howard v. King, 707 F.2d 215,
   220 (5th Cir. 1983). Accordingly, the motion for leave to proceed IFP is
   DENIED, and the APPEAL IS DISMISSED as frivolous. See Baugh,
   117 F.3d at 202 n.24; 5TH CIR. R. 42.2. Grant is WARNED that filing

            _____________________
            *
                This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5.

                                                      2
Case: 22-50869     Document: 00516740520          Page: 3   Date Filed: 05/05/2023

                                   No. 22-50869

   further frivolous appeals will subject her to sanctions. See Fed. R. App. P.
   38; Clark v. Green, 814 F.2d 221, 223 (5th Cir. 1987).

                                             3