Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled June 2, 2025

Mallgren v. United States

Judge
Laura Swain
Docket
1:25-cv-04376
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
1
Civil Procedure
In one sentence

In Mallgren v. United States, Judge Swain dismissed the action and denied permission to appeal without paying filing fees.

Who this affects

Anthony Brian Mallgren, whose action was dismissed and whose request to appeal without paying filing fees was denied; the United States and Harvard University, who were named as defendants.

What happened

In Mallgren v. United States, Anthony Brian Mallgren brought an action against the United States and Harvard University. The judgment states that the action was dismissed for reasons explained in a May 29, 2025, order, which is not included here.

The court also certified that any appeal would not be taken in good faith. It therefore denied Mallgren permission to appeal without paying filing fees.

On June 2, 2025, Judge Laura Taylor Swain entered the civil judgment dismissing the action and denying that fee-waiver status for an appeal.

The detailed version

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

Case
Mallgren v. United States · No. 1:25-cv-04376
Judge
Laura Swain
Date
June 2, 2025

Background

Anthony Brian Mallgren was the plaintiff in an action against the United States and Harvard University. The judgment does not describe the claims or the reasons for dismissal. It refers to a May 29, 2025, order for those reasons, but that order is not included in the provided text.

Rulings

The court dismissed the action. The judgment does not state whether the dismissal was with or without prejudice.

The court certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal from the judgment would not be taken in good faith. Based on that certification, it denied Mallgren permission to appeal without paying filing fees. The judgment does not state any other disposition.

Effect

The provided judgment ends the action in the district court. Because the May 29 order is not provided, the legal basis for dismissal and whether the court reached the merits cannot be determined from this text alone.

The authoritative version

Read the full 1-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.