Perez v. United States Citizenship and Immigration Services
Victor Manuel Perez Perez v. United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS)
- Laura Swain
- 1:25-cv-05553
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In Perez Perez v. USCIS, Judge Swain dismissed the action and denied fee-free status for any appeal.
Victor Manuel Perez Perez's action against United States Citizenship and Immigration Services was dismissed, and he was denied permission to appeal without paying filing fees.
What happened
In Victor Manuel Perez Perez v. United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), the court dismissed the action for reasons stated in an October 10, 2025, order. Those reasons are not included in the provided opinion.
The court also determined that any appeal would not be taken in good faith. It therefore denied Victor Manuel Perez Perez permission to proceed without paying the required fees for an appeal.
Chief Judge Laura Taylor Swain entered the civil judgment on October 16, 2025. The provided opinion does not state the underlying basis for the dismissal.
The detailed version
- Perez v. United States Citizenship and Immigration Services · No. 1:25-cv-05553
- Laura Swain
- Oct. 16, 2025
Ruling
The court dismissed the action. The judgment states that the reasons for dismissal were given in an October 10, 2025, order, but that order is not included in the provided text. The basis for the dismissal therefore cannot be determined from this opinion alone.
Appeal and filing fees
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 denied the plaintiff permission to proceed without paying filing fees for an appeal. The judgment cited a Supreme Court decision explaining that good faith exists when an appellant seeks review of a nonfrivolous issue.
Disposition
The action was dismissed, and fee-free status for an appeal was denied. The judgment was signed by Chief United States District Judge Laura Taylor Swain on October 16, 2025.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.