Chambers v. United States Treasury ( 2023 )

Case: 22-50414 Document: 00516679063 Page: 1 Date Filed: 03/16/2023
United States Court of Appeals
for the Fifth Circuit United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
____________
FILED
March 16, 2023
No. 22-50414
____________ Lyle W. Cayce
Clerk
Anthony Chambers,
Plaintiff—Appellant,
versus
United States Treasury,
Defendant—Appellee.
______________________________
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Texas
USDC No. 6:22-CV-424
______________________________
Before Higginbotham, Duncan, and Wilson, Circuit Judges.
Per Curiam: *
Anthony Chambers, currently incarcerated at the McLennan County
Jail (inmate # 103895), moves for leave to proceed in forma pauperis (IFP)
on appeal following the district court’s dismissal, as frivolous, of his pro se
complaint. Chambers challenges the district court’s determination that the
appeal would not be taken in good faith. See Baugh v. Taylor, 117 F.3d 197,
202 (5th Cir. 1997); Fed. R. App. P. 24(a)(3)-(5). Our inquiry into whether
_____________________
*
This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5.
Case: 22-50414 Document: 00516679063 Page: 2 Date Filed: 03/16/2023
No. 22-50414
an appeal is taken in good faith “is limited to whether the appeal involves
legal points arguable on their merits (and therefore not frivolous).” Howard
v. King, 707 F.2d 215, 220 (5th Cir. 1983) (internal quotation marks and
citations omitted).
In his IFP motion and supporting brief, Chambers does not make any
reference to or specifically assert any errors in the district court’s analysis of
his claims. Nevertheless, Chambers cannot make the requisite showing that
he has a nonfrivolous issue for appeal. See Howard, 707 F.2d at 220. As
discussed by the district court, his claims revolve around the legally
unfounded “redemptionist theory.” Cf. Monroe v. Beard, 536 F.3d 198, 203
n.4 (3d Cir. 2008) (explaining the theory). Accordingly, his motion to
proceed IFP is DENIED, and the appeal is DISMISSED as frivolous. See
Baugh, 117 F.3d at 202 & n.24; 5th Cir. R. 42.2.
The district court’s dismissal of Chambers’s complaint as frivolous
and the dismissal of this appeal as frivolous each count as strikes under 28
U.S.C. § 1915(g). See Adepegba v. Hammons, 103 F.3d 383, 388 (5th Cir.
1996), abrogated in part on other grounds by Coleman v. Tollefson, 575 U.S. 532,
537 (2015). Chambers is WARNED that if he accumulates three strikes, he
will not be permitted to proceed IFP in any civil action or appeal filed while
incarcerated or detained in any facility unless he is under imminent danger of
serious physical injury. See § 1915(g).
2