Pena-Sanchez v. New York City
- Laura Swain
- 1:22-cv-04942
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Pena-Sanchez v. New York City, Judge Swain dismissed the complaint after Pena-Sanchez failed to amend it, update his address, or contact the court.
Agustin Pena-Sanchez, whose complaint against New York City and other defendants was dismissed; his permission to proceed without prepaying fees for an appeal was also denied.
What happened
In Pena-Sanchez v. New York City, the court had ordered Pena-Sanchez to file an amended complaint within 60 days and warned that failure to do so would lead to dismissal.
The mailed order was returned as undeliverable. Pena-Sanchez did not file an amended complaint, update his address, or communicate with the court.
Judge Laura Taylor Swain dismissed the complaint for failure to state a claim and directed the clerk to enter judgment. She also denied Pena-Sanchez permission to proceed without paying fees on an appeal after finding that an appeal would not be taken in good faith.
The detailed version
- Pena-Sanchez v. New York City · No. 1:22-cv-04942
- Laura Swain
- July 20, 2023
Background
On May 11, 2023, the court ordered Agustin Pena-Sanchez to file an amended complaint within 60 days. The order stated that failing to comply would result in dismissal. The court mailed the order to the address listed in the complaint, but the mail was returned on June 26, 2023, as undeliverable and unable to be forwarded.
Failure to Comply
Pena-Sanchez did not file an amended complaint, update his address, or communicate with the court. The opinion does not describe the allegations in the original complaint or the changes the court required in an amended complaint.
Ruling
The court dismissed the complaint, which had been filed under the federal process allowing a litigant to proceed without prepaying filing fees, for failure to state a claim under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii). The court also certified that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied permission to proceed without prepaying fees for purposes of an appeal under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3). The clerk was directed to enter judgment. The order does not address the underlying allegations on their merits.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.