Salim v. AUSA_SDNY Office
- Laura Swain
- 1:22-cv-00721
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Salim v. AUSA_SDNY Office, Judge Swain ordered the pro se petitioner to pay $5 or file an IFP application within 30 days.
Mamdouh Salim and the continuation of his habeas action.
What happened
Salim v. AUSA_SDNY Office is a habeas case brought by Mamdouh Salim, who filed the petition without a filing fee or an application to proceed without paying fees in advance.
The court gave Salim 30 days to either pay the $5 filing fee or submit a signed application asking to proceed without prepaying fees. No response from the respondent was required at that time.
Judge Laura Taylor Swain ordered that the case would proceed through the Clerk’s Office if Salim complied, but would be dismissed if he did not. She also denied permission to appeal without prepaying fees.
The detailed version
- Salim v. AUSA_SDNY Office · No. 1:22-cv-00721
- Laura Swain
- Feb. 22, 2022
Background
Mamdouh Salim, proceeding without a lawyer, filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus. The petition was submitted without the required $5 filing fee and without a signed application to proceed without prepaying fees.
Order
The court directed Salim, within 30 days of the order, to do one of two things: pay the $5 filing fee or complete and submit the attached application to proceed without prepaying fees. The application was to identify docket number 22-CV-0721 (LTS). The court explained that, if the application were granted, Salim could proceed without prepaying the filing fee.
The court stated that no answer from the respondent was required at that time. If Salim complied, the case would be processed under the Clerk’s Office procedures. If he failed to comply within the allowed time, the action would be dismissed. The court also certified that an appeal from the order would not be taken in good faith and denied permission to appeal without prepaying fees.
Disposition
Judge Laura Taylor Swain ordered payment of the filing fee or submission of an application to proceed without prepaying fees. The order did not decide the merits of the habeas petition.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.