Quinones v. Biolife Plasma Services Inc
- Laura Swain
- 1:25-cv-03855
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 4
In Hilaria J. Quinones v. Biolife Plasma Services Inc., Judge Stanton dismissed the complaint as frivolous and for failure to state a claim.
Hilaria J. Quinones’s complaint was dismissed, and her fee-free status was denied for purposes of an appeal. The defendants were not required to proceed to a merits trial in this action.
What happened
In Hilaria J. Quinones v. Biolife Plasma Services Inc., Quinones sued Biolife Plasma Services Inc. and two other named defendants, alleging civil-rights violations, false accusations, defamation, threats, invasion, and harassment. She did not identify the relief she sought.
The court reviewed the complaint under the rules for cases filed without paying filing fees. It concluded that the allegations did not plausibly show a violation of Quinones’s rights and dismissed the complaint as frivolous and for failure to state a claim. The court also declined to allow an amended complaint because it found that the defects could not be fixed.
Judge Louis L. Stanton ordered judgment entered and certified that an appeal would not be taken in good faith, denying fee-free status for any appeal.
The detailed version
- Quinones v. Biolife Plasma Services Inc · No. 1:25-cv-03855
- Laura Swain
- June 25, 2025
Background
The action was originally filed in the Eastern District of New York and was transferred to the Southern District of New York. The court had previously granted Quinones permission to proceed without paying filing fees in advance.
Quinones sued Biolife Plasma Services Inc., “CIA Cult Under Covers,” and “Secret Service NY, NJ.” She alleged “all violations of all sorts,” including violations of civil legal rights and income, false accusations, defamation, threats to call the police, illegal invasion, and harassment. The complaint did not identify the relief she wanted.
Court’s analysis
Under the statute governing complaints filed without prepaying fees, the court must dismiss a complaint that is frivolous, fails to state a claim for relief, or seeks money from an immune defendant. The court must also dismiss claims over which it lacks subject-matter jurisdiction.
Although courts read complaints filed by people without lawyers generously, those complaints still must provide a short and plain statement showing an entitlement to relief. The court concluded that Quinones’s allegations did not plausibly allege a violation of her rights. It therefore dismissed the claims under the statute for failure to state a claim and as frivolous.
The court explained that it generally gives a self-represented plaintiff an opportunity to amend a defective complaint, but that leave is not required when amendment would be futile. It found that the defects could not be cured through further amendment and declined to grant leave to amend.
Disposition
The court dismissed the complaint for failure to state a claim on which relief could be granted and as frivolous. It directed the Clerk of Court to enter judgment. It also certified that any appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied Quinones fee-free status for purposes of an appeal.
Read the full 4-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.