Correa v. Ginty
- Vincent Briccetti
- 7:20-cv-05791
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In Correa v. Ginty, Judge Briccetti extended Anthony Correa’s deadline to oppose dismissal motions and denied a filing-fee waiver for any appeal.
Anthony Correa, who received additional time to oppose the defendants’ motions to dismiss, and the defendants, whose reply deadline depended on whether Correa responded.
What happened
Correa v. Ginty concerns defendants’ motions to dismiss Anthony Correa’s amended complaint. Correa was proceeding without a lawyer and without prepaying court fees.
Correa’s opposition was due January 25, 2021, but he did not respond or request more time. The court extended his deadline to March 2, 2021, and required him to file one opposition addressing both motions. If he did not respond, the motions would be treated as fully submitted and unopposed; any replies from defendants would be due March 9, 2021.
Judge Vincent L. Briccetti also ruled that any appeal from the order would not be taken in good faith and denied Correa permission to proceed without prepaying appeal fees. The order did not decide the motions to dismiss.
The detailed version
- Correa v. Ginty · No. 7:20-cv-05791
- Vincent Briccetti
- Feb. 9, 2021
Background
Defendants moved to dismiss Anthony Correa’s amended complaint on January 8, 2021. The opinion states that defendants mailed Correa copies of the motions and supporting documents. Correa was proceeding without a lawyer and without prepaying filing fees. His opposition was due January 25, 2021, under the cited federal and local rules.
Failure to Respond and Deadline Extension
The court stated that Correa had not opposed the motions or requested an extension. The court therefore extended his time to respond until March 2, 2021. It ordered Correa to file one opposition to both motions. If he failed to respond by that date, the motions would be treated as fully submitted and unopposed. If he filed an opposition, defendants’ replies, if any, would be due March 9, 2021.
Appeal-Fee Ruling and Disposition
The court certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal from the order would not be taken in good faith. It therefore denied Correa permission to proceed without prepaying fees for an appeal. The order extended the response deadline; it did not grant or deny the motions to dismiss and did not decide the claims in the amended complaint.
Classification
This is a procedural order because it addressed filing deadlines and appeal-fee status rather than the merits of Correa’s claims or defendants’ motions to dismiss.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.