Lettieri v. U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement
- Laura Swain
- 1:24-cv-02446
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 4
In Lettieri v. U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, Judge Swain denied reconsideration and denied fee-free appeal status.
David C. Lettieri, an incarcerated self-represented plaintiff, remains subject to the earlier three-strikes filing-fee bar after the court denied his motion for reconsideration; the court also denied fee-free status for an appeal from this order.
What happened
In Lettieri v. U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, David C. Lettieri, an incarcerated person representing himself, challenged an earlier order about his ability to proceed without paying court fees. That order found that the law’s three-strikes rule barred him from filing a new federal civil case without paying fees unless he faced imminent danger of serious physical injury, and that his case did not show such danger.
Lettieri asked the court to reconsider that order and alleged a due process violation. The court treated his filing as requesting relief under several rules governing changes to judgments and orders. It found that he had not shown that the court overlooked controlling law, important facts, or any valid ground for relief.
Judge Swain denied the motion for reconsideration. She also denied relief under each of the cited rules and denied fee-free status for any appeal, certifying that an appeal would not be taken in good faith.
The detailed version
- Lettieri v. U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement · No. 1:24-cv-02446
- Laura Swain
- June 4, 2025
Background
David C. Lettieri, who is incarcerated and proceeding without a lawyer, filed this action against U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement and asked to proceed without paying the filing fee. In an earlier order, the court held that the Prison Litigation Reform Act’s “three-strikes” rule, 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g), barred Lettieri from filing a new federal civil action without paying the fee while he was incarcerated, unless he alleged that he was in imminent danger of serious physical injury. The court also found that this action did not contain facts showing such a danger.
Motion for reconsideration
Lettieri moved for reconsideration of the earlier order and challenged the finding that Section 1915(g) barred him from proceeding without paying the filing fee. He also alleged a due process violation. The court liberally interpreted the motion as seeking relief under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 59(e), Local Civil Rule 6.3, and Rule 60(b).
For Rule 59(e) and Local Civil Rule 6.3, the court explained that a party must show that the court overlooked controlling law or facts previously presented. The court found that Lettieri had not made that showing. It noted that he had received notice and an opportunity to challenge the earlier order. The court also noted that, in a prior related proceeding, another federal district court had found that Section 1915(g) barred Lettieri from proceeding without paying the filing fee, and the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit had affirmed that determination.
For Rule 60(b), which allows relief from a judgment or order for specified reasons, the court found that Lettieri had not shown that any of the grounds in the first five provisions applied. The court also denied relief under Rule 60(b)(6), which applies for other reasons justifying relief, because Lettieri had not shown the extraordinary circumstances required for that provision.
Ruling
The court denied Lettieri’s motion seeking reconsideration of the three-strikes bar order and directed the Clerk of Court to terminate the motion. The court also certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal from the order would not be taken in good faith and denied Lettieri permission to proceed without paying the filing fee for an appeal.
Read the full 4-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.