Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Apr. 8, 2022

Mendoza v. USCIS

Judge
Alison Nathan
Docket
1:21-cv-09296
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
Civil ProcedureMotion to Dismiss
In one sentence

In Mendoza v. USCIS, Judge Nathan adopted a recommendation, granted USCIS’s motion, and dismissed Mendoza’s amended complaint with prejudice for lack of jurisdiction.

Who this affects

Jesus Mendoza and USCIS; the amended complaint was dismissed with prejudice, and the case was closed.

What happened

Mendoza v. USCIS concerned USCIS’s motion to dismiss Jesus Mendoza’s amended complaint as frivolous and for lack of jurisdiction. The court had referred the motion to Magistrate Judge Katharine H. Parker, and Mendoza did not file an opposition.

Judge Parker recommended dismissing the amended complaint with prejudice for lack of jurisdiction. Mendoza’s objections were due April 5, 2022, but none were filed, so the court reviewed the recommendation for clear error and found none.

Judge Alison J. Nathan adopted the recommendation in its entirety, granted USCIS’s motion, and dismissed Mendoza’s amended complaint with prejudice. The court directed the Clerk to enter judgment and close the case.

The detailed version

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

Case
Mendoza v. USCIS · No. 1:21-cv-09296
Judge
Alison Nathan
Date
Apr. 8, 2022

Background

Jesus Mendoza filed an amended complaint against USCIS. USCIS moved to dismiss the action as frivolous and for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2) and Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6). Mendoza did not oppose the motion.

Report and Recommendation

On December 20, 2021, the court referred USCIS’s motion to Magistrate Judge Katharine H. Parker. On March 22, 2022, Judge Parker issued a Report and Recommendation recommending that the court dismiss Mendoza’s amended complaint with prejudice for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction. Objections were due April 5, 2022, but none were filed.

When no timely objections are filed, the court reviews a magistrate judge’s recommendation for clear error on the face of the record. The court found no clear error.

Ruling

The court adopted the Report and Recommendation in its entirety and granted USCIS’s motion. It dismissed Mendoza’s amended complaint with prejudice for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction. The court directed the Clerk of Court to enter judgment and close the case, and directed that a copy of the order be mailed to Mendoza.

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.