Gilberti PE v. Holy See
- Laura Swain
- 1:24-cv-09107
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 4
In Gilberti PE v. Holy See, Judge Swain denied Joseph D. Gilberti PE’s request to undo the dismissal.
Joseph D. Gilberti PE’s effort to undo the earlier dismissal was unsuccessful. The order also denies him permission to appeal without paying the filing fee.
What happened
In Gilberti PE v. Holy See, Joseph D. Gilberti PE, who was representing himself, asked the court to reconsider its earlier dismissal of the action as frivolous. He submitted a 245-page objection after judgment was entered.
The court treated the filing as requests to change the judgment, reconsider the decision, and obtain relief from the judgment. It denied each request because the filing repeated arguments the court had already rejected and did not identify overlooked law, facts, or a valid reason for relief.
Judge Swain denied the motion for reconsideration. She also ruled that any appeal from the order would not be taken in good faith and denied permission to proceed without paying the appeal filing fee.
The detailed version
- Gilberti PE v. Holy See · No. 1:24-cv-09107
- Laura Swain
- June 9, 2025
Background
Joseph D. Gilberti PE filed the action without a lawyer. On May 27, 2025, the court dismissed the action as frivolous, and the Clerk entered judgment on May 29, 2025. On June 3, 2025, Gilberti filed a 245-page document titled “Objection to Order of Dismissal.”
The court interpreted that filing as three types of requests: a motion to alter or amend the judgment under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 59(e), a motion for reconsideration under Local Civil Rule 6.3, and a motion for relief from a judgment or order under Rule 60(b).
Rule 59(e) and Local Rule 6.3
For a Rule 59(e) motion or a Local Civil Rule 6.3 reconsideration motion, the party must show that the court overlooked controlling law or factual matters that had previously been presented. The court found that Gilberti repeated factual allegations and legal assertions from the complaint that the court had already rejected. It therefore denied the motion under Rule 59(e) and denied the motion under Local Civil Rule 6.3 for the same reasons.
Rule 60(b)
Rule 60(b) permits relief from a judgment for specified reasons, including mistake, newly discovered evidence, misconduct by an opposing party, a void judgment, or other listed circumstances. The court held that Gilberti had not shown that any of the first five grounds applied, so it denied the motion under those provisions. The court also denied relief under Rule 60(b)(6), finding that Gilberti had not shown the extraordinary circumstances required for that provision.
Disposition
The court denied Gilberti’s motion for reconsideration. It also certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that an appeal from the order would not be taken in good faith and denied permission to proceed without paying the appeal filing fee. This order addresses the request to reconsider the earlier dismissal; the opinion does not explain the underlying factual or legal basis for that earlier dismissal beyond describing it as frivolous.
Read the full 4-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.