Rogers v. Walmart
- Laura Swain
- 1:25-cv-02345
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In Rogers v. Walmart, Judge Swain dismissed the complaint without prejudice because Rogers neither paid filing fees nor submitted an IFP application.
The order ended Joshua Rogers’s complaint against Walmart without prejudice. It also denied Rogers permission to proceed without paying fees for an appeal.
What happened
In Rogers v. Walmart, the court ordered Joshua Rogers to either submit an application to proceed without paying filing fees or pay the $405 filing fee. The court warned that failing to do so would result in dismissal.
Rogers did neither within the required thirty days. The court therefore dismissed his complaint without prejudice, meaning the order did not bar refiling.
Judge Laura Taylor Swain directed the clerk to enter judgment and denied Rogers permission to proceed without paying fees on an appeal, certifying that an appeal would not be taken in good faith.
The detailed version
- Rogers v. Walmart · No. 1:25-cv-02345
- Laura Swain
- May 19, 2025
Background
The court had previously directed Joshua Rogers to submit a completed application to proceed without paying filing fees, commonly called an application to proceed in forma pauperis, or to pay the $405 required filing fee. The court gave Rogers thirty days to comply and warned that failure to do so would result in dismissal.
Court’s ruling
Rogers did not submit the application or pay the filing fee. The court dismissed the complaint without prejudice under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1914 and 1915. The court also certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied permission to proceed without paying fees for an appeal. Judge Laura Taylor Swain directed the clerk to enter judgment.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.