Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Sept. 1, 2022

Ravi v. Citigroup Global Markets Holdings, Inc.

Judge
Gregory Woods
Docket
1:21-cv-02223
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
1
Civil Procedure
In one sentence

In Ravi v. Citigroup Global Markets Holdings, Inc., Judge Woods adopted the report and dismissed the second amended complaint with prejudice.

Who this affects

The ruling ended Umashankar Ravi and Saritha Ravi’s case against Citigroup Global Markets Holdings, Inc., dismissed their second amended complaint with prejudice, and denied permission to appeal without paying filing fees.

What happened

Umashankar Ravi and Saritha Ravi sued Citigroup Global Markets Holdings, Inc. The judgment refers to the plaintiffs’ second amended complaint but does not state the claims or the reasons for dismissal.

The court adopted a report and recommendation in full and dismissed the second amended complaint with prejudice. It also denied permission to appeal without paying fees, finding that any appeal would not be taken in good faith, and closed the case.

Judge Gregory Woods entered the ruling described in the judgment, dated September 1, 2022.

The detailed version

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

Case
Ravi v. Citigroup Global Markets Holdings, Inc. · No. 1:21-cv-02223
Judge
Gregory Woods
Date
Sept. 1, 2022

Background

Umashankar Ravi and Saritha Ravi were the plaintiffs, and Citigroup Global Markets Holdings, Inc. was the defendant. The judgment concerns the plaintiffs’ second amended complaint. The excerpt does not identify the claims or explain the underlying reasons for dismissal.

Ruling

The court stated that, for the reasons given in its August 31, 2022 order, it adopted the report and recommendation in full and dismissed the second amended complaint with prejudice. A dismissal with prejudice ends the claims in the case and does not permit them to be brought again in that case.

The court also certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that an appeal would not be taken in good faith. It therefore denied permission to appeal without paying the filing fees. Judgment was entered, and the case was closed.

Judge

The ruling is attributed to Judge Gregory Woods. The excerpt provided is the judgment signed by the clerk and refers to the separate order adopting the report and recommendation.

The authoritative version

Read the full 1-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.