Shabazz v. United States
- Laura Swain
- 1:23-cv-10546
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Shabazz v. United States, Judge Swain denied Shabazz’s motion to seal the public case and denied in forma pauperis status for an appeal.
Danny Amen Anderson Valentine Shabazz, whose motion to seal the case was denied and whose request to proceed without paying appeal fees was denied.
What happened
In Shabazz v. United States, Danny Amen Anderson Valentine Shabazz filed the case in December 2023. The court had dismissed the action without prejudice in February 2024 because he did not pay the required $405 filing fees or submit a completed request to proceed without paying them.
More than ten months after that dismissal, Shabazz asked the court to seal the case from internet services. He said, “I don’t know the party and he does not know me.” The court noted that the case and its filings had been public for more than a year and said those concerns no longer had legal relevance.
The court denied the motion to seal. Judge Laura Taylor Swain also certified that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied Shabazz permission to proceed without paying appeal fees.
The detailed version
- Shabazz v. United States · No. 1:23-cv-10546
- Laura Swain
- Apr. 15, 2025
Background
Danny Amen Anderson Valentine Shabazz filed this pro se action against the United States of America and Barack Obama on December 4, 2023. The case appeared on the public docket the next day. By order and judgment entered February 14, 2024, the court dismissed the action without prejudice because Shabazz had not complied with an earlier order requiring him either to pay the $405 filing fee or submit a completed application to proceed in forma pauperis, meaning without prepaying the filing fee.
Motion to Seal
On January 8, 2025, more than ten months after the dismissal, Shabazz moved to seal the case “from all internet pipelines and services.” He stated that “I don’t know the party and he does not know me.” The court explained that the action and its filings had been available for public scrutiny for more than a year. It concluded that any concerns arising from the filing or the information in the court records had no legal relevance at that point.
Ruling
The court denied Shabazz’s motion to seal. Under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3), the court also certified that any appeal from the order would not be taken in good faith and denied in forma pauperis status for purposes of an appeal.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.