Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled July 23, 2025

Ofer v. Mark

Judge
Laura Swain
Docket
1:25-cv-05067
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
1
Civil Procedure
In one sentence

In Ofer v. Mark, Judge Swain dismissed the action and denied in forma pauperis status for any appeal.

Who this affects

Raz Ofer's action against Robert A. Mark was dismissed, and the court denied in forma pauperis status for any appeal from the judgment.

What happened

In Ofer v. Mark, the court entered judgment dismissing the action. The judgment refers to reasons stated in a separate July 23, 2025, order, but that order is not included here.

The court also certified that any appeal would not be taken in good faith. As a result, it denied in forma pauperis status for purposes of an appeal, meaning the plaintiff could not proceed without paying the required appeal costs under that status.

Judge Laura Taylor Swain signed the judgment on July 23, 2025. The judgment does not state whether the dismissal was with or without prejudice.

The detailed version

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

Case
Ofer v. Mark · No. 1:25-cv-05067
Judge
Laura Swain
Date
July 23, 2025

Disposition

The court entered a civil judgment dismissing the action. The judgment states that the reasons for dismissal appear in a July 23, 2025, order, but that separate order is not included in the provided text. The judgment therefore does not reveal the basis for the dismissal or whether the court reached the merits of any claim.

Appeal-related ruling

The court certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal from the judgment would not be taken in good faith. It therefore denied in forma pauperis status for purposes of an appeal. In practical terms, the judgment denies permission to pursue an appeal without paying the required costs under that status.

Classification

This is classified as a procedural order because the provided judgment dismisses the action without stating that the court decided the underlying legal claims. The judgment does not state that the dismissal is with prejudice or without prejudice.

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.