Marin v. The Chancellor
- Laura Swain
- 1:22-cv-02839
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
Marin v. The Chancellor: Judge Swain dismissed the complaint without prejudice because Marin neither filed the required application nor paid filing fees.
Mel Marin's complaint was dismissed without prejudice because Marin did not complete the required filing-fee or fee-waiver requirements. The court did not reach the underlying claims against the Chancellor of the University of Oxford or the University of Oxford.
What happened
In Marin v. The Chancellor, the court required Mel Marin to submit a corrected application to proceed without paying filing fees and a required prisoner authorization, or to pay the $402 filing fee. The court gave Marin additional time after denying requests to file the application under seal and to pause the case.
Marin did not submit the corrected application or pay the filing fee by the deadline. The court therefore dismissed the complaint without prejudice, meaning the dismissal did not bar refiling.
Judge Laura Taylor Swain also denied Marin permission to appeal without paying fees, finding that an appeal would not be taken in good faith, and directed the clerk to enter judgment.
The detailed version
- Marin v. The Chancellor · No. 1:22-cv-02839
- Laura Swain
- Dec. 9, 2022
Background
The court had ordered Mel Marin to submit an amended application to proceed without paying filing fees and a prisoner authorization within 30 days, or to pay the $402 required filing fee. The court denied Marin's requests to file the amended application under seal and for a stay, but granted extensions of time. On October 3, 2022, the court gave Marin another 30 days to comply and warned that failure to do so would result in dismissal.
Ruling
Marin did not file the amended application or pay the filing fees. The court dismissed the complaint without prejudice under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1914 and 1915. The court also certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied fee-free status for an appeal. The clerk was directed to enter judgment. The opinion did not address the underlying claims against the defendants.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.