Li v. Jaddou
- Jesse Furman
- 1:22-cv-04462
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Li v. Jaddou, Judge Swain ordered Xinye Li to pay fees or submit an application to proceed without prepayment, or face dismissal.
Xinye Li, who must either pay the required fees or submit an application to proceed without prepaying them within 30 days to avoid dismissal of the action.
What happened
In Li v. Jaddou, Xinye Li brought a self-represented lawsuit seeking a court order requiring action by Ur Jaddou, the Director of U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services.
Li submitted the complaint without paying the required $402 in fees and without submitting an application to proceed without prepaying fees. The court ordered Li to pay or submit the application within 30 days. No summons would issue at that time.
Judge Swain ordered that the case would be processed if Li complied, but that it would be dismissed if Li did not. The court also denied fee-free status for any appeal, stating that an appeal would not be taken in good faith.
The detailed version
- Li v. Jaddou · No. 1:22-cv-04462
- Jesse Furman
- June 14, 2022
Background
Xinye Li filed a self-represented action seeking a writ of mandamus, meaning a court order requiring a government official or agency to take a particular action. The complaint named Ur Jaddou, identified in the caption as the Director of U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, as the defendant.
Filing-fee requirement
The court explained that a civil plaintiff must either pay $402 in fees—a $350 filing fee and a $52 administrative fee—or submit a signed application to proceed without prepaying fees. Li submitted the complaint without either the fees or an application.
Order
The court ordered Li, within 30 days of the order, to either pay the $402 or submit the attached application. If the application were granted, Li could proceed without prepaying fees. The court directed that no summons issue at that time. It stated that the case would be processed under the Clerk’s Office procedures if Li complied, and that the action would be dismissed if Li failed to comply within the allowed time.
The court also certified that any appeal from the order would not be taken in good faith and denied fee-free status for purposes of an appeal.
Disposition
The order directs payment of fees or submission of an application to proceed without prepayment; it does not decide the merits of Li’s mandamus claim.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.