Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled July 17, 2026

Lima v. Rashid

Full caption

Adriana Lima; Erich Colucci Lima v. Raphael Rashid; Marie-Christine Rashid; Xavier Henry-Rashid; Hyunsu Yim; Hannah Abraham; John Kennedy; Jeff Benjamin; Nirmika Singh; Ruth Bashinsky; Jay Penske; Raj Kamal Jha; Benny Luo; Ibrahim Helal; Mirko Bibic; John Does 1-50

Judge
Laura Swain
Docket
1:26-cv-05939
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
9
Civil ProcedurePro Se
In one sentence

In Adriana Lima v. Raphael Rashid, Chief Judge Swain ordered the plaintiffs to pay fees or submit applications and signed complaint pages.

Who this affects

The two plaintiffs, Adriana Lima and Erich Collucci Lima, must meet the fee, application, and signature requirements before the case can be processed; the order does not decide the claims against the defendants.

What happened

Adriana Lima v. Raphael Rashid concerns a lawsuit filed without lawyers by Adriana Lima and Erich Collucci Lima. The court found that neither plaintiff had signed the complaint or the application asking to proceed without paying fees upfront.

The court gave each plaintiff 30 days to either pay the total $405 filing and administrative fees or separately complete and sign an application to proceed without prepaying fees. Each plaintiff must also separately sign and submit the complaint’s signature pages.

Chief Judge Swain said no summons would issue yet. If the plaintiffs comply, the Clerk’s Office will process the case; if they do not, the action will be dismissed without prejudice. The court also denied fee-free status for any appeal from this order.

The detailed version

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

Case
Lima v. Rashid · No. 1:26-cv-05939
Judge
Laura Swain
Date
July 17, 2026

Background

Adriana Lima and Erich Collucci Lima brought the action without lawyers. The order does not decide the claims’ underlying merits. Instead, it addresses filing fees and the requirement that unrepresented parties personally sign court papers.

Fees

The court explained that starting a civil action requires either paying $405 in total—a $350 filing fee and a $55 administrative fee—or submitting a signed application to proceed without prepaying fees, commonly called an IFP application. The plaintiffs submitted one application purporting to cover both of them, but neither plaintiff signed it. The court also found that the limited financial information provided did not establish that either plaintiff could not afford the fees.

Within 30 days of the order, the plaintiffs must either pay the total $405 or each separately complete, sign, and submit an IFP application labeled with docket number 26-CV-5939 (LTS). If the court grants the applications, the plaintiffs may proceed without paying the fees upfront.

Signatures

Neither plaintiff signed the complaint. Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 11(a) requires an unrepresented party to personally sign a pleading, motion, or other paper. The court directed each plaintiff to sign and submit the attached signature pages within 30 days. For documents mailed or filed in person, the plaintiffs must sign them. If submitted by email, each plaintiff may use a digital signature or a typed name preceded by “/s/.”

Ruling and consequences

Chief United States District Judge Laura Taylor Swain ordered each plaintiff to submit a signed signature page within 30 days and ordered the plaintiffs either to pay the total $405 in fees or each to submit a separate, signed IFP application within the same period. No summons shall issue at this time. If the plaintiffs comply, the case will be processed under the Clerk’s Office procedures. If they fail to comply within the allowed time, the action will be dismissed without prejudice. The court also certified that an appeal from this order would not be taken in good faith and denied IFP status for purposes of an appeal.

The authoritative version

Read the full 9-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.