Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Oct. 13, 2023

Jones v. Annucci

Judge
Laura Swain
Docket
1:23-cv-06917
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
Civil ProcedureMotion to Dismiss
In one sentence

In Jones v. Annucci, Judge Swain dismissed the action without prejudice after Jones failed to pay fees, file required forms, or submit signed pages.

Who this affects

Daniel Jones’s action against Anthony Annucci and the other named defendants was dismissed without prejudice; any pending motions were denied as moot.

What happened

In Jones v. Annucci, the court ordered Daniel Jones to either submit paperwork requesting permission to proceed without paying filing fees and a required prisoner authorization, or pay the $402 filing fee. The court also ordered him to resubmit original signed pages for his complaint and motion for appointment of counsel.

Jones did not submit the required paperwork, pay the filing fee, or provide signed pages, even after the court warned that failing to comply would lead to dismissal.

Judge Laura Taylor Swain dismissed the action without prejudice, meaning it was not permanently barred on that basis, and denied any pending motions as moot. She also denied permission to appeal without paying fees because the appeal would not be taken in good faith, and directed the Clerk of Court to enter judgment.

The detailed version

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

Case
Jones v. Annucci · No. 1:23-cv-06917
Judge
Laura Swain
Date
Oct. 13, 2023

Background

The court had issued two earlier orders. In an August 8, 2023 order, it directed Daniel Jones, within 30 days, to submit a completed application to proceed without paying the filing fee and a prisoner authorization, or to pay the $402 in fees required to file a civil action. The order warned that failing to comply would result in dismissal.

In an August 9, 2023 order, the court directed Jones, also within 30 days, to resubmit the signature pages of his complaint and his motion for appointment of counsel with original signatures. That order likewise warned that failure to comply would result in dismissal.

Court’s Ruling

The court found that Jones had not submitted the application or prisoner authorization, paid the filing fees, or submitted signed signature pages. It therefore dismissed the action without prejudice. The court also denied any pending motions as moot.

The court certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that an appeal from the order would not be taken in good faith and denied permission to appeal without paying fees. It directed the Clerk of Court to enter a judgment dismissing the action.

Classification

This was a procedural dismissal based on Jones’s failure to satisfy filing requirements. The court did not decide the underlying claims against Anthony Annucci or the other defendants.

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.