Colon v. Gunsett
- Vincent Briccetti
- 7:22-cv-00635
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In Colon v. Gunsett, Judge Briccetti extended Jose Rivera Colon’s deadline to oppose defendants’ dismissal motion and denied appeal fee-waiver status.
Jose Rivera Colon and the defendants whose motion to dismiss the amended complaint remained pending.
What happened
In Colon v. Gunsett, defendants had asked the court to dismiss Jose Rivera Colon’s amended complaint. Colon, who was representing himself and had permission to proceed without paying filing fees, had not responded by the original deadline.
The court extended Colon’s deadline to oppose the dismissal motion to January 18, 2024. Defendants’ reply, if any, was due February 1, 2024.
Judge Vincent L. Briccetti stated that if Colon did not respond by January 18, the court would treat the motion as ready for decision and unopposed. The court also denied fee-waiver status for any appeal, finding that an appeal would not be taken in good faith.
The detailed version
- Colon v. Gunsett · No. 7:22-cv-00635
- Vincent Briccetti
- Dec. 19, 2023
Background
Defendants moved to dismiss the amended complaint on September 29, 2023. A scheduling order set November 30, 2023, as the deadline for Jose Rivera Colon’s opposition and December 14, 2023, as the deadline for defendants’ reply. The order states that Colon was proceeding without a lawyer and without paying filing fees, and that he had not responded to the motion.
Order
The court extended Colon’s deadline to oppose the motion to dismiss to January 18, 2024. Defendants’ reply, if any, was due February 1, 2024. The court stated that if Colon did not oppose the motion by January 18, it would treat the motion as fully submitted and unopposed and decide it later.
Appeal and effect
Judge Vincent L. Briccetti certified that any appeal from this order would not be taken in good faith and denied Colon permission to proceed without paying fees for an appeal. This order did not decide defendants’ motion to dismiss or the merits of the amended complaint.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.