Walter v. Blinken
- Laura Swain
- 1:22-cv-09414
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
Sanders, Walter II v. Blinken: Judge Swain dismissed the complaint without prejudice because Walter did not pay the fee or file a fee-waiver application.
The plaintiff’s complaint was dismissed without prejudice for failure to pay the filing fee or submit an application to proceed without paying it. The court also denied fee-waiver status for an appeal and directed entry of judgment.
What happened
In Sanders, Walter II v. Blinken, the court ordered Walter to either submit an application to proceed without paying filing fees or pay the required $402 fee within 30 days.
Walter instead filed a notice seeking an immediate appeal of that order and appeared to challenge the court’s authority to collect the fee. The court found the appeal notice defective because it challenged a nonfinal order that had not been approved for immediate appeal.
The court dismissed the complaint without prejudice because Walter had not submitted the fee-waiver application or paid the filing fee. Judge Laura Taylor Swain also denied fee-waiver status for any appeal and directed the Clerk of Court to enter judgment.
The detailed version
- Walter v. Blinken · No. 1:22-cv-09414
- Laura Swain
- Jan. 20, 2023
Background
By an order dated November 22, 2022, the court directed Plaintiff to submit a completed application to proceed without paying filing fees or to pay the $402 required filing fee within 30 days. The court warned that failure to comply would result in dismissal of the complaint.
On November 27, 2022, Plaintiff filed a notice of interlocutory appeal, apparently challenging the November 22 order. Plaintiff also appeared to challenge the court’s authority to collect the filing fee. The court explained that the appeal notice did not remove the case from its jurisdiction because it sought review of a nonfinal order that had not been certified for an immediate appeal. The court therefore retained jurisdiction.
Ruling
The court dismissed the complaint without prejudice under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1914 and 1915 because Plaintiff had neither filed an application to proceed without paying filing fees nor paid the required fees.
The court also certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal from the order would not be taken in good faith and denied fee-waiver status for purposes of an appeal. It directed the Clerk of Court to issue judgment in the action.
Effect of the Order
The dismissal was without prejudice, so the opinion does not state that Plaintiff is permanently barred from refiling. The order resolved the case based on the filing-fee requirement and did not address the merits of the underlying complaint.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.