Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Aug. 9, 2022

Jimenez v. Dept. of Justice

Judge
Laura Swain
Docket
1:22-cv-06676
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
Civil ProcedurePro Se
In one sentence

In Jose Sanchez Jimenez v. Dept. of Justice, Judge Swain dismissed the action without prejudice after finding Young Yil Jo filed it for another person.

Who this affects

The action identified Jose Sanchez Jimenez as the petitioner, but the court found that Young Yil Jo filed it. The dismissal preserved any civil action Jimenez might bring in the future and continued filing restrictions against Jo.

What happened

In Jose Sanchez Jimenez v. Dept. of Justice, the court received an action identified as filed by Jose Sanchez Jimenez, but found that Young Yil Jo had actually filed it.

The court noted that Jo had previously been barred from filing documents in another person’s name and from starting a new civil case in the court without permission. Those filing restrictions remained in effect.

Judge Laura Taylor Swain dismissed the action without prejudice to any case Jimenez might bring in the future. She also denied permission to appeal without paying court fees, and the clerk was directed to enter judgment.

The detailed version

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

Case
Jimenez v. Dept. of Justice · No. 1:22-cv-06676
Judge
Laura Swain
Date
Aug. 9, 2022

Background

The court received this pro se action—an action filed without a lawyer—on August 5, 2022, purportedly from Jose Sanchez Jimenez. The court found that Young Yil Jo had actually filed it.

The court noted that, in a prior related proceeding, Jo had been barred from filing documents in the court in another person’s name. Jo had also been barred from filing any new civil action or proceeding in the court without first obtaining permission.

Ruling

The court dismissed the action without prejudice to any civil action Jose Sanchez Jimenez might wish to bring in the future. The court stated that Jo’s existing filing injunctions remained in effect: Jo could not file a new civil action or proceeding in the court without first obtaining leave, and could not file any document in the court in another person’s name.

The court stated that it would continue dismissing actions Jo filed in another person’s name, without prejudice to that person’s possible future action. It also warned that additional restrictions and sanctions could follow if Jo continued this conduct.

Other disposition

Judge Laura Taylor Swain certified that an appeal from the order would not be taken in good faith and denied permission to appeal without paying the required court fees. The clerk was directed to enter judgment.

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.