Yifru v. Tietz
- Laura Swain
- 1:22-cv-01385
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In Yifru v. Tietz, Judge Swain dismissed Yifru’s federal claims after he failed to amend and declined jurisdiction over state-law claims.
Abiy Yifru’s federal claims were dismissed, and the court declined to exercise jurisdiction over any state-law claims. His permission to proceed without paying the filing fee for an appeal was also denied.
What happened
In Yifru v. Tietz, the court had ordered Abiy Yifru to file an amended complaint within 60 days and warned that failing to do so would lead to dismissal. Yifru did not file an amended complaint.
The court dismissed Yifru’s federal claims under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii). It declined to exercise supplemental jurisdiction—the court’s authority to hear related state-law claims—under 28 U.S.C. § 1367(c)(3).
Judge Laura Taylor Swain also certified that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied Yifru permission to proceed without paying the filing fee for an appeal.
The detailed version
- Yifru v. Tietz · No. 1:22-cv-01385
- Laura Swain
- June 1, 2022
Background
On March 29, 2022, the court ordered Plaintiff Abiy Yifru to file an amended complaint within 60 days. The order warned that failure to comply would result in dismissal. Yifru did not file an amended complaint.
Ruling
The court dismissed Yifru’s federal claims under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii). The opinion does not provide further explanation of the underlying federal claims or the specific basis for dismissal beyond Yifru’s failure to file the required amended complaint.
The court declined, under 28 U.S.C. § 1367(c)(3), to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over any state-law claims. Supplemental jurisdiction is a federal court’s authority to hear related state-law claims in a case involving federal claims.
The court also certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal from the order would not be taken in good faith. It therefore denied permission to proceed without paying the filing fee for purposes of an appeal.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.