Jamaal Gittens v. Carla Archie

• Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
• Decided: November 3, 2025
• Docket: 24-2022
• Status: Unpublished

Opinion

USCA4 Appeal: 24-2022 Doc: 8 Filed: 11/03/2025 Pg: 1 of 2

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 24-2022

JAMAAL GITTENS,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

CARLA ARCHIE,

Defendant - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Frank D. Whitney, Senior District Judge. (3:24-cv-00817-FDW-DCK)

Submitted: October 30, 2025 Decided: November 3, 2025

Before RUSHING and BENJAMIN, Circuit Judges, and KEENAN, Senior Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Jamaal Gittens, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. USCA4 Appeal: 24-2022 Doc: 8 Filed: 11/03/2025 Pg: 2 of 2

PER CURIAM:

Jamaal Gittens appeals from the district court’s order denying his motion for leave

to proceed in forma pauperis in his action filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. ∗ Upon

review, we discern no abuse of discretion in the district court’s denial of leave to proceed

in forma pauperis after observing Gittens’ history of abusing the privilege of proceeding in

forma pauperis. See In re Sindram, 498 U.S. 177, 180 (1991) (observing the court’s “duty

to deny in forma pauperis status to those individuals who have abused the system”).

Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s order. Gittens v. Archie, No. 3:24-cv-00817-

FDW-DCK (W.D.N.C. Oct. 1, 2024). We dispense with oral argument because the facts

and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and

argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED

∗ We have jurisdiction over this appeal because an order denying “a motion to proceed in forma pauperis is an appealable [interlocutory] order.” Roberts v. U.S. Dist. Ct., 339 U.S. 844, 845 (1950) (per curiam).