Chapman v. Exxon Mobil Corp, et al

*Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the Court has determined that this opinion should not be
published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R.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.
United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
F I L E D
July 24, 2007
Charles R. Fulbruge III
Clerk
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 06-10830
Summary Calendar
SONYA L. CHAPMAN,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
VERSUS
EXXON MOBIL CORPORATION,
Defendant-Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of Texas, Dallas
(3:05-CV-1808-R)
Before DeMOSS, STEWART, and PRADO, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Appellant Sonya Chapman appeals the district court’s order
dismissing her complaint. The district court adopted the
magistrate’s recommendation and dismissed Chapman’s complaint for
want of prosecution pursuant to Rule 41(b) and, in the alternative,
because the complaint was legally frivolous pursuant to 28 U.S.C.
§ 1915(e)(2)(B)(i).
This Court applies an abuse of discretion standard of review
to a dismissal for want of prosecution or for failure to obey a

-- 1 of 2 --

2
court order for. Larson v. Scott, 157 F.3d 1030, 1032 (5th Cir.
1998). Furthermore, “[w]e review a determination that a case is
frivolous under § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i) for abuse of discretion.”
Newsome v. EEOC, 301 F.3d 227, 231 (5th Cir. 2002).
We agree with the magistrate’s report that Chapman has been
given ample opportunity to comply with the court’s orders and that,
given her representations, her complaint is untimely and frivolous
as a matter of law. See Gartrell v. Gaylor, 981 F.2d 254, 256 (5th
Cir. 1993). Therefore, we find no abuse of discretion and affirm
for the reasons stated in the report adopted by the district court.
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --