Annabi v. New York University Stern School of Business
- Lewis Liman
- 1:22-cv-03795
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Annabi v. New York University, Judge Liman denied Annabi’s request to stop NYU’s 2022–2023 Entrepreneur’s Challenge.
Karim Annabi and New York University; the ruling allowed the 2022–2023 Entrepreneur’s Challenge to proceed.
What happened
In Annabi v. New York University, pro se plaintiff Karim Annabi asked the court to stop New York University from holding its 2022–2023 Entrepreneur’s Challenge. He also complained about being rejected from two NYU competitions and barred from using a university entrepreneurship center for advising.
Annabi alleged irregularities in the Challenge’s selection process and claimed that NYU gave alcohol as a prize, including to minors. He supported his request only with his amended complaint and did not provide legal argument.
The court denied the preliminary-injunction request because Annabi did not show that he was likely to succeed or would suffer irreparable harm without an order stopping the competition. Judge Liman directed the Clerk of Court to close the motion.
The detailed version
- Annabi v. New York University Stern School of Business · No. 1:22-cv-03795
- Lewis Liman
- Dec. 6, 2022
Background
Karim Annabi, who represented himself, moved under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 65 for a preliminary injunction—an order issued before final judgment to prevent threatened harm. He asked the court to enjoin New York University from conducting the 2022–2023 Entrepreneur’s Challenge.
Annabi alleged that he was rejected from the New York University Designership Hackathon Contest and the New York University Entrepreneur’s Challenge. He also alleged that he was barred from using the Berkley Center for Entrepreneurship for startup advising sessions. The opinion states that Annabi is a New York University alumnus, a solo entrepreneur, and the founder of a startup called Activate.
Annabi further alleged irregularities and improprieties in the Entrepreneur’s Challenge selection process. He also asserted that New York University served alcohol as a prize to winners, including people who were minors. The opinion states that his motion was supported only by his amended complaint and contained no legal argument.
Legal Standard
The court explained that a party seeking a preliminary injunction must show either a likelihood of success on the merits or sufficiently serious questions for litigation combined with a balance of hardships strongly favoring the plaintiff. The party must also show a likelihood of irreparable injury without the injunction, that the balance of hardships favors the plaintiff, and that an injunction would not harm the public interest. A preliminary injunction is an extraordinary remedy and is not automatically available.
Ruling
The court denied Annabi’s motion. It held that he failed to establish either a likelihood of success on the merits or irreparable harm. The court stated that Annabi did not allege facts showing that he would be injured if the competition proceeded, or that any personal harm would violate a legally protected interest that the court could enforce. The court also stated that his application lacked facts establishing that New York University served alcohol to minors and that Annabi admitted he might not have standing to complain about that practice.
Judge Lewis J. Liman directed the Clerk of Court to close Docket Number 42, the docket entry for the motion.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.