Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled June 3, 2025

Purisima v. U.S. Commissioner of Social Security

Judge
Laura Swain
Docket
1:25-cv-04419
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
1
Civil ProcedurePro Se
In one sentence

Purisima v. U.S. Commissioner of Social Security: Judge Swain dismissed the case without prejudice for filing without required permission and denied fee-free appeal status.

Who this affects

Anton Purisima's newly filed case was dismissed without prejudice, and he was denied permission to appeal without paying filing fees upfront. The opinion does not state any ruling on the defendants' underlying Social Security issues.

What happened

In Anton Purisima v. U.S. Commissioner of Social Security, Purisima filed a new case without a lawyer and asked to proceed without paying filing fees upfront. A 2013 court order had barred him from filing new cases without first obtaining permission.

Purisima had not asked for that permission before filing this case. The court therefore dismissed the action without prejudice, meaning the dismissal did not permanently bar refiling. The clerk was directed to enter judgment.

Judge Laura Taylor Swain also ruled that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied Purisima permission to appeal without paying the filing fees upfront. The opinion does not decide the underlying Social Security dispute.

The detailed version

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

Case
Purisima v. U.S. Commissioner of Social Security · No. 1:25-cv-04419
Judge
Laura Swain
Date
June 3, 2025

Background

Anton Purisima filed this new case without a lawyer and requested permission to proceed without paying court filing fees upfront, a status commonly called proceeding without paying fees. The opinion states that, on May 29, 2013, the court had barred Purisima from filing any new case under that status unless he first obtained the court's permission.

Court's Reasoning

Purisima had not sought the required permission before filing this action. The court concluded that he failed to comply with the 2013 order and dismissed the action under 28 U.S.C. § 1651. The opinion does not address the merits of Purisima's underlying Social Security claims.

Ruling

The court dismissed the action without prejudice. It 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 filing fees for an appeal. The clerk was directed to enter judgment.

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.