Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled June 30, 2025

Nunez v. Silber

Judge
Laura Swain
Docket
1:25-cv-03879
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
Civil ProcedurePro Se
In one sentence

In Nunez v. Silber, Judge Swain denied Javier Nunez’s reconsideration motion, warned about future filings, and denied a fee waiver for any appeal.

Who this affects

Javier Nunez, who filed the motion and was warned that continued frivolous or otherwise nonmeritorious filings could lead to a filing restriction, and any attempted appeal from this order.

What happened

In Nunez v. Silber, Javier Nunez, representing himself, asked the court to reconsider the dismissal of this case under federal rules governing changes to judgments and relief from judgments.

The court denied that request for the same reasons given in its earlier order. It again warned Nunez that continued frivolous or otherwise meritless filings could lead to a requirement that he obtain permission before filing more documents in this case.

Judge Laura Taylor Swain also ruled that any appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied Nunez permission to proceed without paying the appeal fees. She directed the Clerk of Court to close the motion.

The detailed version

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

Case
Nunez v. Silber · No. 1:25-cv-03879
Judge
Laura Swain
Date
June 30, 2025

Background

Javier Nunez, who was representing himself, had previously filed motions seeking relief from the dismissal of this case under Rules 59(e) and 60(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. In an earlier order, the Court construed those filings as requests to change or set aside the judgment and denied them. The Court also warned that continued frivolous or otherwise nonmeritorious filings could result in a filing restriction requiring Nunez to obtain the Court’s permission before filing future documents.

Motion and Ruling

Nunez then filed another motion for reconsideration under Rule 60(b), which the Court understood as again seeking relief under Rules 59(e) and 60(b) from the dismissal of this action. The Court denied that relief for the same reasons stated in its earlier order. This was a denial of the reconsideration request, not a new ruling on the underlying claims.

Additional Orders

The Court again warned Nunez that continued frivolous or otherwise nonmeritorious filings in this action could lead to an order requiring him to show why he should not be barred from filing future documents without the Court’s permission. Under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3), Judge Laura Taylor Swain certified that an appeal from this order would not be taken in good faith and denied permission to appeal without paying the required fees. The Court directed the Clerk of Court to terminate ECF 9.

Disposition

The Court denied Nunez’s motion for reconsideration, denied permission to proceed without paying appeal fees, and terminated ECF 9.

The authoritative version

Read the full 2-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.