Dubose v. Jiminez
- Vincent Briccetti
- 7:22-cv-02124
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Dubose v. Jiminez, Judge Briccetti extended Dubose’s response deadline and denied fee-free status for any appeal.
Tyrek Dubose and the defendants, including C.O. Jiminez; the order primarily affected the deadlines for briefing the defendants’ partial motion to dismiss and Dubose’s ability to proceed without paying fees on an appeal.
What happened
In Dubose v. Jiminez, Tyrek Dubose, who was representing himself and proceeding without paying filing fees, sued C.O. Jiminez and other defendants. The defendants filed a partial motion to dismiss, but Dubose had not opposed it by the existing deadline.
The court extended Dubose’s deadline to oppose the motion to January 25, 2023. The defendants’ reply, if any, is due February 8, 2023. The court stated that no further extensions would be granted and that, if Dubose did not respond, it would consider the motion submitted and decide it later.
Judge Vincent L. Briccetti also certified that an appeal from this order would not be taken in good faith and denied Dubose permission to proceed without paying fees for an appeal. The order did not decide the defendants’ partial motion to dismiss.
The detailed version
- Dubose v. Jiminez · No. 7:22-cv-02124
- Vincent Briccetti
- Jan. 9, 2023
Background
Tyrek Dubose brought this action against C.O. Jiminez and other defendants. The opinion states that Dubose was representing himself and proceeding without paying filing fees. The defendants filed a partial motion to dismiss on September 30, 2022.
The court had previously extended Dubose’s deadline to oppose the motion to December 28, 2022, and the defendants’ deadline to reply to January 11, 2023. Dubose had not filed an opposition by the time of this order.
Ruling
The court extended Dubose’s deadline to oppose the defendants’ partial motion to dismiss to January 25, 2023. The defendants’ reply, if any, was due February 8, 2023. The court stated that no further extensions would be granted. If Dubose did not file an opposition by January 25, the court would treat the motion as ready for decision and decide it later.
Judge Vincent L. Briccetti certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal from this order would not be taken in good faith. The court therefore denied permission to proceed without paying fees for purposes of an appeal. The order did not rule on the partial motion to dismiss itself. Chambers was directed to mail a copy of the order to Dubose at the address on the docket.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.