Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Feb. 4, 2020

No v. USA LWS

Judge
Colleen McMahon
Docket
1:19-cv-11674
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
Civil Procedure
In one sentence

In Jeong-Suk No v. USA LWS (NYC), Judge McMahon dismissed the complaint without prejudice after No neither paid the fee nor filed a proper fee-waiver request.

Who this affects

Jeong-Suk No’s complaint was dismissed without prejudice because No did not pay the filing fee or submit a compliant amended fee-waiver application. Fee-waiver status was also denied for any appeal from the order.

What happened

In Jeong-Suk No v. USA LWS (NYC), the court had ordered Jeong-Suk No to file an amended request to proceed without paying filing fees or pay the $400 civil-filing fee within 30 days.

No did neither. The court said that a handwritten document submitted on January 23, 2020, was illegible and did not follow the earlier order.

Judge Colleen McMahon dismissed the complaint without prejudice. She also certified that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied fee-waiver status for any appeal.

The detailed version

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

Case
No v. USA LWS · No. 1:19-cv-11674
Judge
Colleen McMahon
Date
Feb. 4, 2020

Background

The court had previously directed Jeong-Suk No, within 30 days, either to submit an amended application to proceed without paying filing fees or to pay the $400.00 in fees required to file a civil action. The earlier order warned that failure to comply would result in dismissal of the complaint.

Compliance with the Earlier Order

No did not submit an amended fee-waiver application or pay the filing fee. The opinion notes that No submitted an illegible handwritten document on January 23, 2020, but says that document did not comply with the court’s December 26, 2019 order.

Ruling

The court dismissed the complaint without prejudice under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1914 and 1915. This means the dismissal did not bar refiling based on the order’s stated disposition. Judge Colleen McMahon also certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal from the order would not be taken in good faith and denied fee-waiver status for purposes of an appeal. The Clerk of Court was directed to send the order to No and record service on the docket.

The authoritative version

Read the full 2-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.