Ali #175762 v. Knight et al

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
SOUTHERN DIVISION
FATHIREE ALI #175762,
Plaintiff,
v.
MICHIGAN DEPARTMENT OF
CORRECTIONS, et al.,
Defendants.
________________________________/
Hon. Jane M. Beckering
Case No. 1:22-cv-287
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
Presently before me is Plaintiff’s Request for Transcripts Under 28 U.S.C. § 753(f) for
Substantial Questions for the Sixth Circuit Appellate Review (ECF No. 205), which the Court has
referred pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(3). For the reasons that follow, I recommend that the
request be DENIED.
Plaintiff’s request for a free transcript is governed by 28 U.S.C. § 753(f), which provides,
in pertinent part, “Fees for transcripts furnished . . . to persons permitted to appeal in forma
pauperis shall . . . be paid by the United States if the trial judge or a circuit judge certifies that the
appeal is not frivolous (but presents a substantial question).” “Conclusory allegations in support
of a request for free transcripts do not satisfy these requirements.” Amadasu v. Mercy Franciscan
Hosp., 515 F.3d 528, 530 (6th Cir. 2008) (citing United States v. MacCollom, 426 U.S. 317, 327
(1976)).
Plaintiff satisfies the statute’s first condition because I have granted his application to
proceed in forma pauperis on appeal. (ECF No. 210.) In his notice of appeal, Plaintiff states that
he appeals: (1) the final judgment entered on August 7, 2025 (ECF No. 163) following the jury
Case 1:22-cv-00287-JMB-SJB ECF No. 211, PageID.<pageID> Filed 05/22/26 Page
1 of 2

2
trial on his equal protection claim; (2) the March 31, 2025 Opinion and Order adopting the
December 9, 2024 Report and Recommendation (ECF No. 70); (3) the July 10, 2025 Final Pretrial
Order; and (4) the February 4, 2026 Opinion and Order denying Plaintiff’s Motion for New Trial
(ECF No. 196). In his present motion, Plaintiff identifies a number of issues for appeal that arose
prior to the trial and would not be aided by the transcripts he requests. (ECF No. 205 at
PageID.2029–30.) As to the trial-related issues that Plaintiff has identified for his appeal, for the
reasons set forth in the February 4, 2026 Opinion and Order (ECF No. 196), I recommend that the
Court conclude that Plaintiff has failed to demonstrate a non-frivolous substantial question for
appeal because, as the Court explained, his grounds are meritless.
Accordingly, for the forgoing reasons, I recommend that the Court deny Plaintiff’s request
for transcripts pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 753(f).
Date: May 22, 2026 	/s/ Sally J. Berens
SALLY J. BERENS
U.S. Magistrate Judge
NOTICE
OBJECTIONS to this Report and Recommendation must be filed with the Clerk of Court
within seven days of the date of personal service of this notice. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C). Failure
to file objections within the specified time waives the right to appeal the District Court’s order.
See Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140 (1985); United States v. Walters, 638 F.2d 947 (6th Cir. 1981).
Case 1:22-cv-00287-JMB-SJB ECF No. 211, PageID.<pageID> Filed 05/22/26 Page
2 of 2