Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Feb. 14, 2022

Wu v. The Civil Court of City of New York

Judge
Laura Swain
Docket
1:21-cv-08668
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
Civil ProcedureMotion to Dismiss
In one sentence

In Wu v. The Civil Court of City of New York, Judge Swain denied Wu’s appeal-extension motions as moot and denied fee-free status for any appeal.

Who this affects

Tung Wu’s motions for more time to file a notice of appeal were denied as moot, and he was denied permission to appeal without paying the required fees. The case was directed to proceed through the Clerk’s Office procedures.

What happened

In Wu v. The Civil Court of City of New York, the court had earlier dismissed Tung Wu’s complaint without prejudice because he had not paid the filing fee or applied to proceed without paying it. Wu later paid the fee, and the court reopened the case.

Wu then filed two identical motions asking for more time to file a notice of appeal, but he never filed that notice. Because the case had been reopened and no notice of appeal was filed, the court treated the motions as moot.

Judge Laura Taylor Swain denied the motions as moot and directed the Clerk’s Office to process the case under its usual procedures. Judge Swain also ruled that any appeal from this order would not be taken in good faith and denied Wu permission to appeal without paying the required fees.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
Wu v. The Civil Court of City of New York · No. 1:21-cv-08668
Judge
Laura Swain
Date
Feb. 14, 2022

Background

In an earlier order, the court dismissed Tung Wu’s complaint without prejudice because he had neither paid the $402 filing fee nor submitted an application to proceed without paying the fee. Wu paid the filing fee on January 3, 2022, and the court reopened the case on January 5, 2022.

Motions

On January 20 and January 24, 2022, Wu submitted identical motions seeking an extension of time to file a notice of appeal. The opinion states that Wu did not file a notice of appeal.

Ruling

The court denied the motions as moot. The court explained that the case had been reopened and that Wu had requested additional time to file a notice of appeal without actually filing one. The Clerk’s Office was directed to process the case under its procedures.

The court also certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal from this order would not be taken in good faith. It therefore denied permission to appeal without paying the required fees. This order did not decide the merits of Wu’s underlying complaint.

The authoritative version

Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.