Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled May 16, 2025

Buxbaum v. Rocco's Italian Cuisine & Pizza

Judge
Laura Swain
Docket
1:25-cv-00610
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
Civil ProcedurePro Se
In one sentence

In Buxbaum v. Rocco’s, Judge Swain ordered return of the $405 payment and kept the voluntarily dismissed action closed.

Who this affects

Michael Buxbaum, whose $405 money order must be returned and whose action remains closed; Rocco’s Italian Cuisine & Pizza, which remains a defendant in the closed action.

What happened

In Buxbaum v. Rocco’s Italian Cuisine & Pizza, Michael Buxbaum filed the case without a lawyer and asked to withdraw it because he believed the filing deadline had expired. The court dismissed the complaint voluntarily on March 14, 2025.

The court later received Buxbaum’s $405 money order, even though the case had already been dismissed and no payment was due. The order therefore concerns the payment, not the underlying dispute with Rocco’s Italian Cuisine & Pizza.

Judge Laura Taylor Swain ordered the clerk to return the $405 money order and stated that the action remains closed. She also denied permission to appeal without paying the filing fee, finding that any appeal would not be taken in good faith.

The detailed version

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

Case
Buxbaum v. Rocco's Italian Cuisine & Pizza · No. 1:25-cv-00610
Judge
Laura Swain
Date
May 16, 2025

Background

Michael Buxbaum had filed more than one hundred civil actions in the court since the beginning of 2025, including this case, without paying the required $405 filing fee or submitting an application to proceed without paying the fee. The court directed him to pay the fee or submit such an application.

Before that order was issued, Buxbaum sent a letter asking to withdraw this case because he believed the statute of limitations had expired. On March 14, 2025, the court dismissed the complaint voluntarily under Rule 41(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. On May 6, 2025, the court received Buxbaum’s $405 money order.

Ruling

The court held that the case was closed and that no payment was due in this matter. It directed the clerk to return the $405 money order to Buxbaum and stated that the action remains closed.

The court also certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that an appeal from the order would not be taken in good faith. It therefore denied permission to appeal without paying the appellate filing fee.

Classification

This is a procedural order. The court addressed the closed case and the filing payment, without deciding the underlying legal dispute.

The authoritative version

Read the full 2-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.