Adzimah v. Ross
- Vyskocil
- 1:19-cv-09574
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Adzimah v. Ross, Judge Vyskocil ordered pro se plaintiff Joseph Adzimah to respond or amend by October 14, warning that noncompliance could lead to dismissal.
Joseph M. Adzimah and the defendants, Wilbur L. Ross and the United States Department of Commerce.
What happened
In Adzimah v. Ross, Joseph Adzimah sued over alleged disability discrimination by his employer, the United States Census Bureau. He cited federal disability laws and New York City law.
Defendant Wilbur L. Ross moved to dismiss the complaint for failure to state a claim. The court had twice extended Adzimah’s deadline to amend, but he did not file an amended complaint or otherwise act by the March 27, 2020 deadline.
Judge Mary Kay Vyskocil ordered Adzimah to file either an amended complaint or a response to Ross’s motion by October 14, 2020. She warned that further failure to follow court orders and pursue the case could result in sanctions, including dismissal, but the order did not decide Ross’s motion.
The detailed version
- Adzimah v. Ross · No. 1:19-cv-09574
- Vyskocil
- Sept. 23, 2020
Background
Joseph M. Adzimah, representing himself, filed the action against Secretary Wilbur L. Ross and the United States Department of Commerce. Adzimah alleged that the United States Census Bureau discriminated against him because of his disability, violating the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, and the New York City Human Rights Law.
Ross filed a motion under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6), which asks the court to dismiss a complaint for failing to state a legally sufficient claim. The motion was filed on December 30, 2019.
Deadlines and Court Order
The court initially gave Adzimah until February 7, 2020, to file an amended complaint. The court warned that failing to amend on time in response to the fully briefed arguments could waive his opportunity to use amendment to correct defects identified in Ross’s motion.
The court granted Adzimah’s requests for two extensions. The second extension set a deadline of March 27, 2020. Nearly six months later, Adzimah had not filed an amended complaint or taken any other action to prosecute the case.
The court therefore ordered Adzimah to file either an amended complaint or a response to Ross’s December 30, 2019 motion by October 14, 2020. Judge Mary Kay Vyskocil warned that further failure to comply with court orders and prosecute the case could result in sanctions, including dismissal under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b), which permits dismissal for failure to prosecute or comply with court orders.
Disposition
The order set a new deadline and issued a warning. It did not grant or deny Ross’s motion to dismiss and did not decide whether Adzimah’s discrimination claims were legally sufficient.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.