Gutierrez v. AccuWeather et al, No. 3:2018cv01297 - Document 7 (N.D. Tex. 2018)
Court Description: Order Accepting 6 Findings and Recommendations on Case re: 3 Complaint. The court certifies that any appeal of this action would not be taken in good faith. It is therefore ORDERED that this action is summarily DISMISSED without prejudice for want of jurisdiction. See FED. R. CIV. P. 12(h)(3). Plaintiff is WARNED that if he persists in filing frivolous or baseless actions or actions over which the court lacks subject matter jurisdiction, the court may impose monetary sanctions and/or bar him from bringing any further action. (Ordered by Senior Judge A. Joe Fish on 7/2/2018) (epm)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Gutierrez v. AccuWeather et al Doc. 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS DIVISION ORLANDO M. GUTIERREZ, Petitioner, VS. ACCUWEATHER, ET AL., Respondents. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:18-CV-1297-G (BK) ORDER ACCEPTING FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE The United States Magistrate Judge made findings, conclusions, and a recommendation in this case. No objections were filed. The district court reviewed the proposed findings, conclusions, and recommendation for plain error. Finding none, the court ACCEPTS the findings, conclusions, and recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge. It is therefore ORDERED that this action is summarily DISMISSED without prejudice for want of jurisdiction. See F ED. R. CIV. P. 12(h)(3). Plaintiff is WARNED that if he persists in filing frivolous or baseless actions or actions over which the court lacks subject matter jurisdiction, the court may impose monetary sanctions and/or bar him from bringing any further action. Dockets.Justia.com The court prospectively CERTIFIES that any appeal of this action would not be taken in good faith. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3); FED. R. APP. P. 24(a)(3). In support of this certification, the court adopts and incorporates by reference the magistrate judge’s findings, conclusions, and recommendation. See Baugh v. Taylor, 117 F.3d 197, 202 and n.21 (5th Cir. 1997). Based on the findings and recommendation, the court finds that any appeal of this action would present no legal point of arguable merit and would, therefore, be frivolous. Howard v. King, 707 F.2d 215, 220 (5th Cir. 1983).* In the event of an appeal, plaintiff may challenge this certification by filing a separate motion to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal with the Clerk of the Court, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit. See Baugh, 117 F.3d at 202; FED. R. APP. P. 24(a)(5). SO ORDERED. July 2, 2018. ___________________________________ A. JOE FISH Senior United States District Judge * Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 4(a) governs the time to appeal an order. A timely notice of appeal must be filed even if the district court certifies an appeal as not taken in good faith. -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.
