Johnson v. CDC

Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 6 WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE 7 CLARENCE D. JOHNSON, JR., 8 NO. C21-0572RSL Plaintiff-Appellant, 9 v. CERTIFICATION 10 CDC, et al., 11 Defendants-Appellees. 12 13 On July 19, 2021, the above-captioned matter was dismissed because the allegations of 14 the complaint did not give the named defendants fair notice of the claims against them or give 15 rise to a plausible inference that plaintiff is entitled to relief under. Plaintiff has now appealed 16 17 the dismissal. This matter is again before the Court to determine whether in forma pauperis 18 status should be permitted on appeal. Dkt. # 15. 19 Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3), “[a]n appeal may not be taken in forma pauperis if 20 the trial court certifies in writing that it is not taken in good faith.” For purposes of this statute, 21 “good faith” is generally established “by the presentation of any issue that is not plainly 22 23 frivolous.” Ellis v. U.S., 356 U.S. 674 (1958). Having again reviewed the allegations of the 24 complaint, the Court finds that plaintiff’s claims are frivolous and this appeal is not taken in 25 good faith. 26 27 1 Dated this 16th day of August, 2021. 2 3 Robert S. Lasnik United States District Judge 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27