Avila v. ACACIA Network, Inc.
- Paul Engelmayer
- 1:23-cv-07834
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In Avila v. ACACIA, Judge Engelmayer dismissed both suits, allowed amendment where appropriate, and barred new suits against ACACIA or affiliates without court permission.
Jimmy Avila, whose two suits were dismissed and whose future civil filings in the Southern District of New York against ACACIA Network, Inc. or its affiliates require prior court permission; the defendants, whose request for the filing injunction was granted.
What happened
In Avila v. ACACIA Network, Inc., the court adopted the reports in full and entered judgment dismissing both of Avila’s suits. The provided judgment does not describe the underlying claims or the reports’ reasoning.
The court granted Avila permission to amend to the extent he had not already had an opportunity to do so. It also granted the defendants’ request for an order requiring Avila to obtain the court’s prior permission before filing civil actions in the Southern District of New York against ACACIA or any of its affiliates.
Judge Paul Engelmayer was the judge identified in the case information. The judgment was dated August 6, 2025, and states that both suits were dismissed; it does not state whether the dismissals were with or without prejudice.
The detailed version
- Avila v. ACACIA Network, Inc. · No. 1:23-cv-07834
- Paul Engelmayer
- Aug. 6, 2025
Ruling
The court stated that, for the reasons given in its August 6, 2025 Opinion and Order, it adopted the reports in full and dismissed both suits.
Permission to Amend
The court granted Avila leave to amend insofar as he had not yet had an opportunity to do so. The judgment cites a decision discussing the practice of allowing a self-represented plaintiff at least one opportunity to amend when a valid claim might be stated. The provided judgment does not explain which claims or allegations could be amended.
Filing Injunction
The court separately granted the defendants’ request for a filing injunction. The injunction bars Avila from filing civil actions in the Southern District of New York against ACACIA or any of its affiliates without first obtaining the court’s permission.
What the Provided Text Does Not Establish
The judgment does not identify the grounds for dismissal, describe the underlying claims, state whether the dismissals were with or without prejudice, or explain the scope of the underlying reports beyond saying that the court adopted them in full.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.