K v. The Department of Defense
- Stewart Aaron
- 1:24-cv-07450
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In wenn K v. The Department of Defense, Judge Aaron adopted the recommendation and dismissed the complaint with prejudice under Rule 12(b)(6).
wenn K’s complaint against The Department of Defense was dismissed with prejudice, and permission to proceed without paying filing fees for an appeal was denied.
What happened
wenn K v. The Department of Defense concerned a complaint against the Department of Defense. The opinion does not describe the complaint’s underlying claims.
The court adopted the Report and Recommendation in full, including Judge Aaron’s conclusion that the complaint’s problem was substantive and could not be fixed by better pleading. It dismissed the complaint with prejudice under Rule 12(b)(6), which addresses complaints that do not adequately state a legal claim. The court also denied permission to proceed without paying filing fees for an appeal and closed the case.
Judge Aaron’s conclusion was included in the adopted recommendation. The judgment was entered for the Department of Defense, and the complaint by wenn K was dismissed with prejudice.
The detailed version
- K v. The Department of Defense · No. 1:24-cv-07450
- Stewart Aaron
- Sept. 30, 2025
Background
The available judgment identifies wenn K as the plaintiff and The Department of Defense as the defendant. It does not describe the factual allegations or legal claims in the complaint. The judgment refers to an earlier court order dated September 30, 2025, and to a Report and Recommendation, meaning a recommended ruling submitted for adoption by the court.
Ruling
The court adopted the Report and Recommendation in its entirety. It specifically adopted Judge Aaron’s conclusion that the problem with the complaint was substantive and that better pleading would not cure it.
The complaint was dismissed with prejudice under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). That rule permits dismissal when a complaint does not state a legally sufficient claim. Because the dismissal was with prejudice, the judgment states that the complaint was dismissed on that basis without leaving the complaint open for refiling in this case.
The court also certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied permission to proceed without paying filing fees for purposes of an appeal. The case was closed. The judgment itself is dated October 2, 2025, while the supplied case information lists September 30, 2025, as the filing date.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.