Houston v. Howell

Opinion

1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 2 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 3 Matthew Houston, Case No.: 2:19-cv-01371-JAD-DJA

4 Plaintiff Ninth Circuit Case No. 22-16439

5 v. Order Revoking 6 Jerry Howell, et al., in forma pauperis Status

7 Defendant

8 The United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit referred this matter back to this 9 court for the limited purpose of determining whether in forma pauperis status should continue 10 for this appeal. The decision to continue such status turns on whether the entirety of Houston’s 11 appeal is frivolous, for “[i]f at least one issue or claim is found to be non-frivolous, leave to 12 proceed in forma pauperis on appeal must be granted for the case as a whole.”1 13 In this civil-rights case, plaintiff Matthew Houston sued the Clark County Detention 14 Center, Casa Grande Transitional Housing, and various Nevada Department of Corrections 15 officials, appearing to allege that “he was denied mental-health court, maliciously prosecuted and 16 wrongfully convicted, denied transitional housing at Casa Grande, held months past his parole- 17 eligibility date, and was not accommodated under the Americans with Disabilities Act.”2 On 18 May 20, 2020, I screened his complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A, found that he did not state a 19 claim upon which relief could be granted, and gave him detailed instructions to amend his 20 complaint.3 Because Houston failed to file an amended complaint by the court’s deadline to do 21 22 1 Hooker v. Am. Airlines, 302 F.3d 1091, 1092 (9th Cir. 2002). 23 2 ECF No. 24 at 2–3. 3 Id. at 3–13. 1|| so, I dismissed his case on June 26, 2020.* More than two years later, Houston filed this appeal 2|| of my dismissal order.> Because the appeal from the dismissal order is frivolous, patently untimely, and not taken in good faith, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT the district court revokes in forma pauperis status so in forma pauperis status will not continue on appeal. 5 The Clerk of Court is directed to SEND a copy of this order to the Clerk of the United 6|| States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit for Case No. 22-16439. 7

U.S. Di dge cnr | Dorsey 9 SeptemberZ2, 2022 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 ECF No. 25. > ECF No. 31.