
    Derrick HARRIS, Plaintiff-Appellant v. Delmer MAXWELL, Chief of Security; Unknown Peery, RN (HSA); Charlotte Burns, Programs Warden; Jody Bradley, Head Warden, Defendants-Appellees.
    No. 07-60366
    Summary Calendar.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
    April 2, 2008.
    Derrick Harris, Parchman, MS, pro se.
    Jody Edward Owens, II, Butler, Snow, O’Mara, Stevens & Cannada, Jackson, MS, for Defendants-Appellees.
    Before WIENER, GARZA, and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges.
   PER CURIAM:

Derrick Harris, Mississippi prisoner #95458, moves this court to proceed in forma pauperis (IFP) in this appeal from the district court’s dismissal of his 42 U.S.C. § 1988 complaint against employees of the Delta Correctional Facility. The district court dismissed Harris’s complaint because his allegations did not support a claim of deliberate indifference to his serious medical needs. The district court also denied Harris’s request to proceed IFP on appeal, certifying that the appeal was not taken in good faith. Harris’s IFP motion is a challenge to the district court’s certification that his appeal is not taken in good faith. See Baugh v. Taylor, 117 F.3d 197, 202 (5th Cir.1997).

Harris does not address the district court’s reasons for dismissing his § 1983 complaint. Because he fails to identify any error in the district court’s analysis, any argument is abandoned. See Brinkmann v. Dallas County Deputy Sheriff Abner, 813 F.2d 744, 748 (5th Cir.1987).

Harris has not shown that he will present a nonfrivolous issue on appeal. See Howard v. King, 707 F.2d 215, 220 (5th Cir.1983). Accordingly, the motion for leave 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 dismissal of this appeal as frivolous counts as one strike under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). Harris is cautioned that if he accumulates three strikes under § 1915(g), he will not be able to proceed IFP in any civil action or appeal filed while he is incarcerated or detained in any facility unless he is under imminent danger of serious physical injury. See § 1915(g).

IFP MOTION DENIED; APPEAL DISMISSED; SANCTION WARNING ISSUED. 
      
       Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstánces set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.
     