GLICK v. WALKER

G. MURPHY, District Judge

This matter is before the Court on Plaintiff's motion to reconsider (Doc. 25) a prior Order denying Plaintiff leave to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal. In that Order (Doc. 22), the Court certified that an appeal would not be taken in good faith because Plaintiff could not identify any part of the Court's order dismissing his action as being in error. Plaintiff was directed to pay the appellate filing and docketing fee of $455 to the Clerk of Court in this District, or to reapply to the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals for leave to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal.

Because the instant motion challenges an Order of this Court denying Plaintiff leave to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal, the motion does not challenge the merits of the Court's decision dismissing Plaintiff's complaint. Consequently, the Court has jurisdiction to entertain the instant motion. See generally Chicago Truck Drivers v. Central Transport, Inc., 935 F.2d 114, 119-20 (7^th Cir. 1991) (notice of appeal does not prevent district court from ruling on "collateral matters"); Cf. Turket v. Lund, 623 F.2d 29, 33-34 (7^th Cir. 1980) (district court may award attorneys' fees while the merits are on appeal because matter could not lead to altering the substantive judgment). After carefully reviewing the instant motion, the Court finds no reason for relieving Plaintiff from the prior Order denying him leave to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal. Therefore, Plaintiff's motion to reconsider is DENIED. Plaintiff shall tender the appellate filing and docketing fee of $455 to the Clerk of Court in this District, or he may reapply to the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals for leave to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal.

IT IS SO ORDERED.