No v. Bank of America
- Colleen McMahon
- 1:19-cv-11284
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In No v. Bank of America, Judge McMahon dismissed the complaint for lack of jurisdiction and failure to state a claim after No missed the amendment deadline.
Jeong-Suk No's complaint was dismissed, and permission to proceed without paying the filing fee on appeal was denied. Bank of America was the defendant.
What happened
In Jeong-Suk No v. Bank of America, the court had ordered Jeong-Suk No to file an amended complaint within 60 days and warned that failing to do so would result in dismissal. No did not file an amended complaint.
The court dismissed the complaint for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction and for failure to state a claim. The court also directed the Clerk to close all other pending matters.
Chief Judge Colleen McMahon ruled that any appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied No permission to proceed without paying the filing fee on appeal.
The detailed version
- No v. Bank of America · No. 1:19-cv-11284
- Colleen McMahon
- June 23, 2020
Background
By an order dated March 23, 2020, the court directed Plaintiff Jeong-Suk No to file an amended complaint within 60 days. The order warned that failure to comply would result in dismissal. No did not file an amended complaint. The complaint had been filed without prepaying the filing fee under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(1).
Ruling
The court dismissed the complaint for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(h)(3) and for failure to state a claim under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B). The opinion does not describe the underlying claims or explain the specific defects in the original complaint.
The court directed the Clerk of Court to mail the order to No, record service on the docket, and terminate all other pending matters. Chief United States District Judge Colleen McMahon certified that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied No permission to proceed without paying the filing fee for an appeal.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.