Whitehead v. Netflix Inc.
- Laura Swain
- 1:22-cv-00883
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 4
In Whitehead v. Netflix, Judge Swain denied an extension and required payment or a fee-waiver application within 30 days.
David Louis Whitehead had to either pay the $402 filing fees or submit an IFP application within 30 days. The case would be dismissed if he did not comply, and no summons would issue while this requirement remained unresolved.
What happened
In Whitehead v. Netflix Inc., David Louis Whitehead sued Netflix Inc. and others without a lawyer, but did not pay the required filing fees or submit an application to proceed without prepaying them.
Whitehead asked for 60 more days to pay or submit the application. The court declined that request and gave him 30 days from the order’s date to either pay $402 or submit the application.
Judge Swain denied the extension motion, ordered Whitehead to pay or apply for a fee waiver, and stated that the case would be dismissed if he did not comply. No summons would issue at that time.
The detailed version
- Whitehead v. Netflix Inc. · No. 1:22-cv-00883
- Laura Swain
- Feb. 3, 2022
Background
David Louis Whitehead brought the action without a lawyer. The court explained that starting a civil case required either paying $402 in fees—a $350 filing fee plus a $52 administrative fee—or submitting a signed application to proceed without prepaying fees, commonly called an IFP application.
Whitehead submitted his complaint without paying the fees or submitting an IFP application. Instead, he filed a motion seeking 60 additional days to pay the fees or, alternatively, to submit an IFP application.
Ruling
The court denied Whitehead’s motion for a 60-day extension. It directed him, within 30 days of February 3, 2022, to either pay the $402 in fees or submit the attached IFP application. If the court granted the application, Whitehead could proceed without prepaying the fees.
The court stated that no summons would issue at that time. It further stated that, if Whitehead failed to comply within the allowed period, the action would be dismissed. The court certified that any appeal from the order would not be taken in good faith and denied IFP status for purposes of an appeal. The order did not address the merits of Whitehead’s claims against Netflix Inc. or the other defendants.
Read the full 4-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.