Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled July 20, 2023

Canders v. MSN Online News

Judge
Laura Swain
Docket
1:22-cv-10090
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
3
Civil ProcedureMotion to DismissPro Se
In one sentence

In Canders v. Capellan, Judge Swain dismissed the action after Tijuana J. Canders failed to file an allowed amended complaint, ending the listed claims.

Who this affects

Tijuana J. Canders’s claims against Robbin Capellan and the other defendants were dismissed or not considered as specified in the order.

What happened

In Canders v. Capellan, Tijuana J. Canders sued Robbin Capellan and other defendants. The court had allowed Canders 30 days to file a third amended complaint after dismissing some claims and warned that the action would be dismissed if she did not do so.

Canders did not file the third amended complaint. The Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit had also dismissed her appeal from the earlier order, effective March 30, 2023.

Judge Laura Taylor Swain dismissed the action as previously warned: claims seeking criminal investigation or prosecution were dismissed for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction, copyright and trademark claims were dismissed for failure to state a claim, and state-law claims were not considered under supplemental jurisdiction. The court also denied permission to appeal without paying fees.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
Canders v. MSN Online News · No. 1:22-cv-10090
Judge
Laura Swain
Date
July 20, 2023

Background

Tijuana J. Canders brought this action against Robbin Capellan and other defendants. In an order dated January 26, 2023, the court dismissed Canders’s claims seeking the criminal investigation and prosecution of the defendants for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction. The court also dismissed her copyright-infringement and trademark-infringement claims for failure to state a claim on which relief could be granted.

The court gave Canders 30 days to file a third amended complaint concerning the copyright and trademark claims. It warned that, if she did not do so or show good cause for not doing so, the court would enter judgment dismissing those claims, dismissing the criminal-investigation and prosecution claims, and declining to consider her state-law claims under supplemental jurisdiction.

Subsequent Proceedings

On January 26, 2023, Canders filed a notice of appeal and several motions concerning the appeal. In a February 24, 2023 order, the court treated the notice as an attempted interlocutory appeal, denied her request for more time to file a notice of appeal as unnecessary, and denied her requests to proceed without paying appeal fees as moot. The Second Circuit dismissed the appeal, effective March 30, 2023.

Canders did not file a third amended complaint.

Ruling

The court dismissed the action for the reasons stated in its January 26, 2023 order. It directed the Clerk of Court to enter judgment in the following manner: (1) dismissing the claims seeking criminal investigation and prosecution for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction; (2) dismissing the copyright and trademark claims for failure to state a claim under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii); and (3) declining to consider the state-law claims under supplemental jurisdiction. Judge Laura Taylor Swain also certified that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied permission to appeal without paying fees.

The authoritative version

Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.