Komatsu v. Urban Pathways, Inc.
- Laura Swain
- 1:22-cv-09080
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 6
In Komatsu v. Urban Pathways, Judge Swain denied reconsideration and recusal requests but allowed 30 more days to amend the complaint.
Towaki Komatsu’s reconsideration and recusal requests were denied, but he received an additional 30 days to file an amended complaint; permission to appeal without paying filing fees was also denied.
What happened
In Komatsu v. Urban Pathways, Inc., Towaki Komatsu, who was representing himself, asked the court to reconsider its January 26, 2023 order and asked Judge Laura Taylor Swain to step aside. That earlier order allowed him to amend his complaint to bring certain debt-collection claims and dismissed most of his other claims.
The court said Komatsu had not shown that it overlooked controlling law or facts, made a mistake covered by the applicable rules, or faced extraordinary circumstances that justified changing the order. The court also found no facts suggesting that its impartiality could reasonably be questioned or that it showed deep-seated favoritism or antagonism.
Judge Swain denied Komatsu’s reconsideration letter-motions and his request for recusal. The court gave him an additional 30 days to file an amended complaint. It also certified that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied permission to proceed without paying the appeal filing fees.
The detailed version
- Komatsu v. Urban Pathways, Inc. · No. 1:22-cv-09080
- Laura Swain
- Apr. 18, 2023
Background
Towaki Komatsu filed the action without a lawyer. In a January 26, 2023 order, the court allowed him to file an amended complaint asserting claims under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act against Daniels Norelli Cecere & Tavel PC, Harold Rosenthal, Allison Heilbraun, and Eric Tavel. The court dismissed most of his remaining claims, including claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, the civil provision of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, and New York State and City law. The court also dismissed claims arising from public meetings against Steve Banks, Penny Ringel, and Lorri Kletter under a prefiling injunction issued in a prior related proceeding.
After that order, Komatsu submitted letters seeking reconsideration under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 59(e), Local Civil Rule 6.3, and Rule 60. He also sought Judge Swain’s recusal, meaning that she would step aside from the case.
Reconsideration Requests
The court denied the request under Rule 59(e) because Komatsu did not show that the court had overlooked controlling legal authority or factual matters previously presented. The court applied the same standard under Local Civil Rule 6.3 and denied reconsideration under that rule as well.
The court also denied relief under Rule 60(b). It found that Komatsu had not shown that any of the specified grounds in the rule—such as mistake, newly discovered evidence, misconduct, or a void judgment—applied. The court separately denied relief under Rule 60(b)(6), finding that Komatsu had not shown extraordinary circumstances warranting relief.
Recusal Request
The court explained that recusal is required when a judge’s impartiality might reasonably be questioned. A judge’s rulings ordinarily are not enough to establish bias; they generally provide grounds for an appeal instead. Komatsu offered only an assertion of bias and identified no facts showing deep-seated favoritism or antagonism that would make fair judgment impossible. The court therefore denied the recusal request.
Disposition
The court denied Komatsu’s letter-motions for reconsideration and denied his letter-motion seeking Judge Swain’s recusal. It granted Komatsu an additional 30 days to file an amended complaint. 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 permission to appeal without paying the filing fees.
Read the full 6-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.