Charles R. Derrer, Plaintiff-appellant, v. Lakewood Housing Authority (clifton Williams, Jr.),defendant-appellee, 38 F.3d 1220 (10th Cir. 1994)

After examining the briefs and appellate record, this panel has determined unanimously that oral argument would not materially assist the determination of this appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a); 10th Cir. R. 34.1.9. The case is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument.

This matter is before the court on Appellant's motion for leave to proceed on appeal without prepayment of costs or fees. We grant this motion.

Appellant's motion under 10th Circuit Rule 27.4 for an extension of time to file a brief is denied. Appellant has failed to demonstrate that the matter under appeal is so complex that an adequate brief cannot reasonably be prepared. In fact, Appellant has filed two lengthy briefs already.

Appellant's motion under 10th Circuit Rule 27.1 to Certify a Question of State Law is denied. In addition to failing to comply with the formal filing requirements of the rule, Appellant has failed to demonstrate that there is a controlling question of state law in this case.

As to the merits of Appellant's claim, Appellant has failed minimally to satisfy the requirements of Fed. R. App. P. 27(a) and 28(a). We hold pro se pleadings to "less stringent standards than formal pleadings drafted by lawyers." Meade v. Grubbs, 841 F.2d 1512, 1526 (10th Cir. 1988) (quoting Haines v. Kerner, 404 U.S. 519, 520 (1972). However, even a pro se appellant must provide a comprehensible statement of the issues, the argument, and the precise relief sought. Fed. R. App. P. 28(a). Because we are unable to determine the precise basis of the claim and the relief sought, the appeal is DISMISSED.²