Wang v. International Business Machines Corp.
- Vincent Briccetti
- 7:11-cv-02992
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Wang v. International Business Machines Corp., Judge Briccetti denied Wang’s motion and imposed a filing injunction, while declining monetary sanctions.
Jian Wang, also known as James Wang, is directly affected by the denial, filing injunction, and warning of future monetary sanctions. International Business Machines Corp. and its attorneys are affected because Wang must provide them a copy of any permission request and may be required to reimburse related fees and costs.
What happened
Wang v. International Business Machines Corp. concerned Jian Wang’s attempt to vacate the judgment in the case through a filing called a “Motion to Clarify Fact.” The court said the motion repeated arguments that had already been rejected and was frivolous.
The court denied the motion as plainly without merit. It also barred Wang from filing any further motion, letter, or other submission in the case unless he first asks for permission in a one-page letter explaining the basis for the filing and provides a copy to IBM’s lawyer.
Judge Vincent L. Briccetti did not impose monetary sanctions at that time, but warned that another frivolous filing would lead to an order requiring Wang to pay IBM’s attorneys’ fees and costs for addressing it. The judge also denied fee-free status for any appeal because the appeal would not be taken in good faith.
The detailed version
- Wang v. International Business Machines Corp. · No. 7:11-cv-02992
- Vincent Briccetti
- May 20, 2021
Background
Jian Wang, also known as James Wang, filed a submission titled “Motion to Clarify Fact” seeking to vacate the judgment in the case. The court stated that Wang had repeatedly filed frivolous and vexatious motions and other submissions, including this motion, and that the arguments had previously been rejected by both the district court and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit. Wang was representing himself.
The court had warned Wang in a May 10, 2021 order that another frivolous motion would be summarily denied and could result in an order restricting future filings. That earlier order also warned that monetary sanctions might be imposed.
Ruling
The court denied Wang’s motion as plainly without merit. It then issued a filing injunction, meaning that Wang may not file another motion, letter, or other submission in this case unless he first sends the court a letter seeking permission and explaining the basis for the proposed filing. The letter may not exceed one page, and Wang must send a copy to IBM’s counsel. The court will decide whether to allow the proposed filing.
The court did not impose monetary sanctions at that time. It stated that if Wang filed another frivolous motion, letter, or other submission, it would impose a monetary sanction requiring him to reimburse IBM’s attorneys for fees and costs incurred in reviewing and responding to that filing.
The court also certified that any appeal from the order would not be taken in good faith and denied Wang permission to appeal without prepaying fees. The clerk was instructed to terminate the motion.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.