FILED
United States Court of Appeals
Tenth Circuit

DEC 23 2004

PATRICK FISHER
Clerk

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

TENTH CIRCUIT

MICHAEL BATH,

	Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS; JOE, Executive Director, Colorado D.O.C.; GARY GOLDER, WARDEN, S.C.F. C.D.O.C.; CAROL SOARES, Associate Warden, S.C.F. C.D.O.C.; MARK BRODDUS, Associate Warden, S.C.F. C.D.O.C.; K. DAIKER, Case Manager, S.C.F. C.D.O.C.; JOHN DOE BACKER, Case Manager, S.C.F. C.D.O.C.; JON CRUSSELL, Case Manager, S.C.F. C.D.O.C.; J. MARTIN, Case Manager, S.C.F. C.D.O.C.; JOHN DOE McMONAGLE, Case Manager, S.C.F. C.D.O.C.; ROGER LAWLESS, Case Manager, S.C.F. C.D.O.C.; JOHN DOE CLINE, Capt., C.M. III Case Manager, S.C.F. C.D.O.C.; JANE DOE CONRAD, C.M. III Case Manager, S.C.F. C.D.O.C.; PRESTON TENEYCK, Food Service, S.C.F. C.D.O.C.; JOHN DOE WILDENSTEIN, Capt., S.C.F. C.D.O.C.; JOHN DOE USARY, Capt. S.C.F. C.D.O.C.; RAYMOND LT., HEARINGS OFFICER, S.C.F. C.D.O.C.; TOM BULLARD, Hearings Officer, S.C.F. C.D.O.C.; JOHN DOE ZENT, Case Manager, S.C.F. C.D.O.C.

	Defendants - Appellees. 	

No. 04-1123
(D. Colorado)
(D.Ct. No. 04-Z-342)	

ORDER DENYING IN FORMA PAUPERIS
AND DISMISSING APPEAL*

Before SEYMOUR, LUCERO, and O’BRIEN, Circuit Judges.

	After examining the briefs and appellate record, this panel has determined unanimously that oral argument would not materially assist the determination of this appeal.  See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2); 10th Cir. R. 34.1.9(G).  The case is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument.
	Michael Bath, along with other inmates at the Sterling Correctional Facility in Sterling, Colorado, filed a pro se complaint on February 25, 2004 alleging prison officials violated their federal constitutional and state law rights, including their Eighth Amendment right to be free from cruel and usual punishment and their Fourteenth Amendment right to due process, when they were administratively segregated within the prison population.  On March 22, 2004, the district court dismissed the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendment claims as frivolous under 28 U.S.C. 1915A(b)(1).  Bath individually appeals.
	Bath renews his claim that his Eight Amendment and Fourteenth Amendment due process rights were violated when he was segregated within the prison population.  Having reviewed Bath’s opening brief, we, like the district court, cannot discern a reasoned, non‑frivolous argument on the law and facts in support of the issues he raises on appeal.
	Accordingly, we DISMISS the appeal as frivolous.  Bath’s motion to proceed in forma pauperis is DENIED.  Bath is ordered to pay the full appellate 

filing fee within twenty (20) days of this order. 

						Entered by the Court:

						Terrence L. O’Brien
						United States Circuit Judge