United States District Court, W.D. Tennessee, Eastern Division
ORDER ADOPTING MAGISTRATE JUDGE'S REPORT AND
RECOMMENDATION ORDER OF DISMISSAL ORDER DENYING LEAVE TO
APPEAL IN FORMA PAUPERIS ORDER CERTIFYING APPEAL NOT TAKEN IN
THOMAS ANDERSON CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE.
the Court is the United States Magistrate Judge' Report
and Recommendation that the Court dismiss Plaintiff's
Complaint sua sponte for failure to state a claim.
Plaintiff Melissa Buford, who is proceeding pro se,
filed her Complaint for violation of the Americans with
Disabilities Act on August 11, 2017. Pursuant to
Administrative Order 2013-05, this case was assigned to the
United States Magistrate Judge for management of all pretrial
matters, including the issuance of a screening order under 28
U.S.C. § 1915(e). On December 12, 2017, the Magistrate
Judge issued a report and recommendation as part of his
screening of the Complaint and recommended that the Complaint
be dismissed for failure to state a claim. Objections to the
Report and Recommendation were due within fourteen (14) days
of the entry of the Report, making the objections due no
later than December 27, 2017. Giving Plaintiff the benefit of
the additional three days allowed under Federal Rule of Civil
Procedure 6(d), Plaintiff's objections were due at the
very latest by Tuesday, January 2, 2018. To date Plaintiff
has filed no objections to the Magistrate Judge's Report.
The Court need not review, under a de novo or any
other standard, those aspects of the report and
recommendation to which no specific objection is made.
Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 150 (1985). Rather, the
Court may simply adopt the recommendations of the Magistrate
Judge to which no specific objection is filed. Id.
at 151. In the absence of any objection to the Magistrate
Judge's Report and Recommendation, the Court hereby
ADOPTS the Report. Plaintiff's Complaint
is dismissed sua sponte for failure to state a
next issue to be addressed is whether Plaintiff should be
allowed to appeal this decision in forma pauperis.
Under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3), an appeal may not be taken
in forma pauperis if the trial court certifies in
writing that it is not taken in good faith. The good faith
standard is an objective one. Coppedge v. United
States, 369 U.S. 438, 445 (1962). An appeal is not taken
in good faith if the issue presented is frivolous.
Id. The same considerations that lead the Court to
conclude the Complaint fails to state a claim also compel the
conclusion that an appeal would not be taken in good faith.
It is therefore CERTIFIED, pursuant to 28
U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3), that any appeal in this matter by
Plaintiff would not be taken in good faith and Plaintiff may
not proceed on appeal in forma pauperis.
Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals decisions in McGore v.
Wrigglesworth, 114 F.3d 601, 612-13 (6th Cir. 1997) and
Floyd v. United States Postal Serv., 105 F.3d 274,
276 (6th Cir. 1997) apply to any appeal filed by Plaintiff in
this case. If Plaintiff files a notice of appeal, she must
pay the entire $505 filing fee required by 28 U.S.C.
§§ 1913 and 1917. The entire filing fee must be
paid within thirty (30) days of the filing of the notice of
appeal. By filing a notice of appeal, Plaintiff becomes
liable for the full amount of the filing fee, regardless of
the subsequent progress of the appeal. If Plaintiff fails to
comply with the above assessment of the appellate filing fee
within thirty (30) days of the filing of the notice of appeal
or the entry of this order, whichever occurred later, the
Court will notify the Sixth Circuit, which will dismiss the
appeal. If the appeal is dismissed, it will not be reinstated
once the fee is paid. McGore, 114 F.3d at 610.
Clerk is directed to enter judgment.
IS SO ORDERED.
 The 14-day period actually expired on
Tuesday, December 26, 2017, a date on which the Clerk's
Office was closed in observance of the Christmas holiday. As
a result, Plaintiff's 14 days ran out the following
 Tuesday, January 2, 2018, was the next
business day on which the Clerk's Office was open.
Plaintiff's third day under Rule 6(d) fell on Saturday,
December 30, 2017, and Monday, January 1, 2018, was New
 The district court may extend this
deadline one time by thirty (30) days if the motion to extend
is filed before the expiration of the original deadline.