Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Aug. 28, 2023

Jones v. H&M Hennes & Mauritz

Judge
Laura Swain
Docket
1:23-cv-04778
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
Civil ProcedureEmploymentPro Se
In one sentence

In Jones v. H&M Hennes & Mauritz, Judge Swain granted Jones more time to amend her complaint after its earlier dismissal.

Who this affects

Loretta Jones, who received 30 additional days to file an amended complaint but was denied permission to proceed without paying filing fees for an appeal.

What happened

Loretta Jones is representing herself in an employment-discrimination case against H&M Hennes & Mauritz and other defendants. The court had dismissed her complaint but allowed her 30 days to file an amended complaint under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

Jones asked for more time, saying she had only recently found the dismissal order in her email. The court granted her request and required her to submit the amended complaint within 30 days of this order.

Judge Laura Taylor Swain also ruled that any appeal from this order would not be taken in good faith and denied Jones permission to proceed without paying filing fees for an appeal.

The detailed version

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

Case
Jones v. H&M Hennes & Mauritz · No. 1:23-cv-04778
Judge
Laura Swain
Date
Aug. 28, 2023

Background

Loretta Jones brought this employment-discrimination action without a lawyer and was proceeding without paying filing fees. On July 27, 2023, the court dismissed her complaint but gave her 30 days to file an amended complaint asserting employment-discrimination claims under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

On August 28, 2023, Jones sent a letter stating that she had only recently found the dismissal order in her email. She asked for an extension of time to file her amended complaint.

Ruling

The court granted Jones's request for an extension of time. It ordered her to submit the amended complaint to the court's Pro Se Intake Unit within 30 days of the date of this order.

The court also certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal from this order would not be taken in good faith. It therefore denied Jones permission to proceed without paying filing fees for an appeal.

The authoritative version

Read the full 2-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.