Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Jan. 17, 2025

Cummings v. John Doe OMH Provider

Judge
Katherine Failla
Docket
1:23-cv-11184
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
3
Civil ProcedureMotion to Dismiss
In one sentence

In Cummings v. Cassar, Judge Failla amended the pleading, set a dismissal-motion schedule, and corrected the caption.

Who this affects

Najay Cummings and defendants James Cassar and Chelsea Whittaker; the order also directed the Clerk of Court to take specified administrative actions.

What happened

In Cummings v. Cassar and Whittaker, the court treated factual statements Najay Cummings made during a January 17, 2025 conference as part of his operative amended complaint. The case had not yet reached a decision on the defendants’ request to dismiss it.

The court set deadlines for the defendants’ motion to dismiss: opening papers were due March 7, 2025; Cummings’s opposition was due April 18, 2025; and the defendants’ reply was due May 9, 2025. The court also told the defendants to provide Cummings with copies of cited cases and, if they obtained the conference transcript, to mail him a copy.

Judge Katherine Polk Failla directed the Clerk to correct the caption to identify a defendant properly and to mail Cummings a copy of the order. This was a procedural order and did not decide the underlying claims or the motion to dismiss.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
Cummings v. John Doe OMH Provider · No. 1:23-cv-11184
Judge
Katherine Failla
Date
Jan. 17, 2025

Background

This order addressed issues discussed at a pre-motion conference, before briefing on the defendants’ planned motion to dismiss. The opinion identifies the operative pleading as Cummings’s Amended Complaint.

Pleading

The court deemed the Amended Complaint amended to include factual assertions, as distinct from legal arguments, that Cummings made during the conference. The court noted that defendants could choose to obtain a transcript for use in briefing the motion. If they did so, the court directed them to mail Cummings a copy at his address of record. The court also cautioned the defendants to follow Second Circuit limits on materials that may be considered when deciding a motion under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6), which concerns whether a complaint adequately states a claim.

Schedule and Caption

The court scheduled the motion to dismiss as follows:

- Defendants’ opening submissions: on or before March 7, 2025 - Cummings’s opposition: on or before April 18, 2025 - Defendants’ reply: on or before May 9, 2025

The defendants were reminded to send Cummings copies of cases cited in their memoranda. Based on clarification from defense counsel about the proper name of one defendant, the court directed the Clerk of Court to amend the caption as specified in the order. The Clerk was also directed to mail Cummings a copy of the order.

Disposition

Judge Katherine Polk Failla entered a procedural order addressing the pleading, briefing schedule, and caption. The order did not grant or deny the anticipated motion to dismiss and did not decide the merits of the claims.

The authoritative version

Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.