Dugas v. USA, et al, No. 20-40329 (5th Cir. 2021)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
Case: 20-40329 Document: 00516133012 Page: 1 Date Filed: 12/15/2021 United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED No. 20-40329 Summary Calendar December 15, 2021 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Jarvis Dugas, Plaintiff—Appellant, versus The United States of America; The State of Texas; The Judicial System of Texas; The Southern District of Texas Court House; Ken Paxton; Magistrate Judge Janice B. Ellington; Erick Echavarry; Donna Plannstiel; David J. Bradley; United States District Judge Hilda G. Tagle; Pfannstiel Donnal, Defendants—Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 2:19-CV-302 Before Higginbotham, Higginson, and Duncan, 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 Per Curiam:* * Pursuant to 5th Circuit Rule 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Circuit Rule 47.5.4. Case: 20-40329 Document: 00516133012 Page: 2 Date Filed: 12/15/2021 No. 20-40329 Jarvis Dugas, Texas prisoner # 1386881, filed this 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action in connection with his two prior civil cases. The district court dismissed his claims as frivolous and for failure to state a claim. Dugas timely appealed. In his brief, Dugas does not challenge the district court’s conclusions that his claims were frivolous and failed to state a claim. He has therefore abandoned any challenge to the district court’s dismissal. See Fed. R. App. P. 28(a)(8); Yohey v. Collins, 985 F.2d 222, 225 (5th Cir. 1993); Brinkmann v. Dallas Cnty. Deputy Sheriff Abner, 813 F.2d 744, 748 (5th Cir. 1987). Because he has not shown “exceptional circumstances” warranting the appointment of counsel, his motion for the appointment of counsel is DENIED. See Baranowski v. Hart, 486 F.3d 112, 126 (5th Cir. 2007); Cupit v. Jones, 835 F.2d 82, 86 (5th Cir. 1987); Ulmer v. Chancellor, 691 F.2d 209, 212 (5th Cir. 1982). The district court’s judgment is AFFIRMED. Pursuant to a prior decision that we issued while this appeal was pending, Dugas remains barred from proceeding in forma pauperis in any civil action or appeal filed in a court of the United States while he is incarcerated or detained in any facility unless he is under imminent danger of serious physical injury. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g); Dugas v. Scott, 853 F. App’x 998, 999 (5th Cir. 2021). He is WARNED that any pending or future frivolous or repetitive filings in this court or any court subject to this court’s jurisdiction may subject him to additional sanctions. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the pending motion for appointment of counsel is DENIED. 2
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
