Futia v. Roberts
- Vincent Briccetti
- 7:23-cv-01774
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Futia v. Roberts, Judge Briccetti extended Futia’s deadline to oppose two dismissal motions and warned that no further extensions would be granted.
Anthony J. Futia, Jr.; Timothy C. Idoni; Chase Bank; and the other parties to the case. The order directly affected Futia’s deadline to respond to Idoni’s and Chase Bank’s motions to dismiss.
What happened
In Futia v. Roberts, Anthony J. Futia, Jr., who was representing himself, had not responded to dismissal motions filed by Timothy C. Idoni and Chase Bank. The case had been removed from state court to federal court.
The court extended Futia’s deadline to respond to both motions from May 15 to June 15, 2023. Idoni and Chase Bank were given until June 29, 2023, to file replies. The court said it would grant no further extensions and would decide the motions if Futia did not respond.
Judge Vincent L. Briccetti also ruled that an appeal from this order would not be taken in good faith and denied permission to appeal without paying the required fees. The court did not decide the dismissal motions in this order.
The detailed version
- Futia v. Roberts · No. 7:23-cv-01774
- Vincent Briccetti
- May 22, 2023
Background
Anthony J. Futia, Jr., proceeding without a lawyer, began the action by filing a summons and complaint in New York state court on February 2, 2023. Raymond Roberts, Douglas O’Donnell, and Kilolo Kijakazi later removed the case to the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York.
Timothy C. Idoni filed a motion to dismiss under Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 12(b)(2), 12(b)(5), and 12(b)(6). These provisions concern personal jurisdiction, service of process, and failure to state a legally sufficient claim. Chase Bank filed a separate motion to dismiss under Rule 12(b)(6).
Order
The court had directed Futia to file one response addressing both motions by May 15, 2023. Futia had not filed a response by the date of this order. The court extended the response deadline to June 15, 2023. Idoni and Chase Bank were permitted to file replies by June 29, 2023.
The court stated that it would grant no further extensions of Futia’s deadline. If Futia did not respond by June 15, the court would treat the motions as ready for decision and decide them later. The order did not rule on the merits of either motion to dismiss.
Appeal certification
Under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3), the court certified that any appeal from this order would not be taken in good faith and denied permission to appeal without paying the required filing fees. The court also directed its chambers to mail Futia a copy of the order at the address listed on the docket.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.