
    Ricky Ronnell EWING, Plaintiff-Appellant v. Druetta TAYLOR, Case Manager; Unknown Miller, Officer; Unknown Walker, Officer, Defendants-Appellees
    No. 17-60400
    United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
    Filed December 7, 2017
    Ricky Ronnell Ewing, Pro Se
    Tommy Darrell Goodwin, Esq., Assistant Attorney General, Office of the Attorney General for the State of Mississippi, Jackson, MS, for Defendants-Appellees
    Before DENNIS, SOUTHWICK, and HIGGINSON, Circuit Judges.
   PER CURIAM:

Ricky Ronnell Ewing, Mississippi prisoner # 34353, moves for leave to proceed in forma pauperis (IFP) on appeal from the dismissal of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint. The district court denied Ewing leave to proceed IFP on appeal, certifying that the appeal was not taken in good faith because Ewing had not sought review of any issue that was arguable on its merits.

Ewing pleads his indigency but does not challenge any legal aspect of the district court’s disposition of his § 1983 complaint or the certification that his appeal is not taken in good faith. Accordingly, he has abandoned the critical issues of his appeal. See Brinkmann v. Dallas County Deputy Sheriff Abner, 813 F.2d 744, 748 (5th Cir. 1987). Thus, the appeal lacks arguable merit and is therefore frivolous. See Howard v. King, 707 F.2d 215, 220 (5th Cir. 1983). Ewing’s motion for leave to proceed IFP on appeal is DENIED, and his appeal is DISMISSED as frivolous. See Baugh v. Taylor, 117 F.3d 197, 202 n.24 (5th Cir. 1997); 5th Cir. R. 42.2.

The dismissal of this appeal as frivolous counts as a strike under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). See § 1915(g); Coleman v. Tollefson, - U.S. -, 135 S.Ct. 1759, 1763-64, 191 L.Ed.2d 803 (2015). Ewing has at least two other strikes. Ewing v. Richie, et al., 701 Fed.Appx. 397 (5th Cir. 2017); Ewing v. Jone, et al., No. 1:15-CV-254 (S.D. Miss. Feb. 1, 2016). As Ewing has accumulated at least three strikes under § 1915(g), he may not proceed IFP in any civil action or appeal filed in a court of the United States while he is incarcerated or detained in any facility unless he is under imminent danger of serious physical injury. See § 1915(g). Ewing is further warned that any future frivolous or repetitive filings in this court or any court subject to this court’s jurisdiction will subject him to additional sanctions.

MOTION DENIED; APPEAL DISMISSED; § 1915(g) BAR IMPOSED. 
      
       Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47,5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.
     