Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Aug. 31, 2023

Abadi v. American Airlines Inc.

Judge
Lewis Liman
Docket
1:23-cv-04033
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
12
Civil ProcedurePro Se
In one sentence

In Abadi v. American Airlines Group, Judge Liman dismissed claims against President Biden but ordered service on the remaining defendants.

Who this affects

Aaron Abadi’s claims against President Biden were dismissed. The claims against the remaining defendants were not resolved on the merits, and the court ordered service on them. Abadi was also denied permission to proceed without prepaying fees for an appeal.

What happened

Aaron Abadi, representing himself, sued President Biden, federal agencies and officials, airlines, employees, attorneys, and medical advisory groups. He alleged discrimination and interference with his ability to travel under several federal laws, including the Federal Tort Claims Act, Administrative Procedure Act, Air Carrier Access Act, and Rehabilitation Act.

The court dismissed Abadi’s claims against President Biden because the claims concerned acts performed in his official capacity, which are protected by absolute immunity; the court also described those claims as frivolous. The court ordered the Clerk and U.S. Marshals Service to issue and serve papers on the remaining defendants. It also extended the service period to 90 days after summonses are issued and denied permission to proceed without paying fees for any appeal.

Judge Lewis J. Liman issued the August 31, 2023 order. The order did not decide the merits of Abadi’s claims against the remaining defendants, which were directed to proceed to service.

The detailed version

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

Case
Abadi v. American Airlines Inc. · No. 1:23-cv-04033
Judge
Lewis Liman
Date
Aug. 31, 2023

Background

Aaron Abadi, who was representing himself, brought claims under the Federal Tort Claims Act and Administrative Procedure Act against President Biden, the National Institutes of Health, Anthony Steven Fauci, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Robert Ray Redfield, Jr., and the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. He brought claims against the other defendants under the Air Carrier Access Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 1985 and 1986, Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, and federal diversity jurisdiction. The opinion states that Abadi alleged the defendants discriminated against him and prevented him from traveling.

The court had previously allowed Abadi to proceed without prepaying filing fees. For such cases, the court must screen the complaint and dismiss it, or part of it, if it is frivolous, fails to state a legally sufficient claim, seeks money from an immune defendant, or falls outside the court’s subject-matter jurisdiction.

President Biden

The court held that the President has absolute immunity from damages claims based on official acts. Because Abadi’s claims against President Biden concerned acts performed in his official capacity, the court concluded that those claims were barred by absolute immunity and were frivolous. The court therefore dismissed Abadi’s claims against President Biden under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i) and (iii). The order does not state that this dismissal applies to any other defendant.

Service on the Remaining Defendants

Because Abadi was allowed to proceed without prepaying fees, he could rely on the court and the U.S. Marshals Service to serve the remaining defendants. The court instructed the Clerk to issue summonses, complete the required service forms, and provide the necessary documents to the Marshals Service. The remaining defendants included federal agencies and officials, 43 airlines, several employees, two attorneys, and two medical advisory groups.

For the federal defendants, the Clerk was instructed to identify that service was being made on the United States. The court extended the service deadline to 90 days after the summonses were issued because Abadi could not serve the defendants until the court reviewed the complaint and ordered issuance of the summonses. The court stated that Abadi should request an extension if service was not completed within that period and must notify the court in writing of any address change.

Other Directions and Disposition

The court directed the Clerk to mail Abadi an information package and referred him to the New York Legal Assistance Group’s Clinic for Pro Se Litigants. The court also certified that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied Abadi permission to proceed without prepaying fees for an appeal.

The order did not resolve the merits of Abadi’s claims against the remaining defendants. It dismissed the claims against President Biden and directed service of the claims involving the remaining defendants.

The authoritative version

Read the full 12-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.