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

Sreedhar v. Canadian Consulate General

Judge
Laura Swain
Docket
1:25-cv-04476
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
1
Civil Procedure
In one sentence

In Sreedhar v. Canadian Consulate General, Judge Swain granted withdrawal, dismissed the action without prejudice, and denied other pending requests without prejudice.

Who this affects

Srikant(h) Sreedhar and defendants Canadian Consulate General, Parsons Corporation, and Tom Clark; the action was dismissed without prejudice, other pending requests were denied without prejudice, and appeal-related fee-waiver status was denied.

What happened

In Sreedhar v. Canadian Consulate General, Srikant(h) Sreedhar asked to withdraw the action on May 30, 2025. The defendants were Canadian Consulate General, Parsons Corporation, and Tom Clark.

The court granted the withdrawal request and dismissed the action without prejudice under Rule 41(a)(2) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. That means the dismissal did not bar refiling. The court also denied any other pending motion or request without prejudice.

Chief Judge Laura Taylor Swain ruled that any appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied permission to appeal without paying court fees. The order was dated June 2, 2025.

The detailed version

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

Case
Sreedhar v. Canadian Consulate General · No. 1:25-cv-04476
Judge
Laura Swain
Date
June 2, 2025

Background

Srikant(h) Sreedhar sued Canadian Consulate General, Parsons Corporation, and Tom Clark. On May 30, 2025, Sreedhar filed a motion asking to withdraw the action.

Ruling

Chief United States District Judge Laura Taylor Swain granted the motion. The court dismissed the action without prejudice under Rule 41(a)(2) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. A dismissal without prejudice does not bar the plaintiff from refiling the action. The court also denied without prejudice any other pending motion or request in the action.

Appeal and filing fees

The court certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal from the order would not be taken in good faith. It therefore denied in forma pauperis status for an appeal, meaning Sreedhar could not appeal under that fee-waiver status based on this order.

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.