Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Mar. 14, 2024

Fang v. U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services

Judge
Laura Swain
Docket
1:24-cv-01851
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
4
ImmigrationPro SeCivil Procedure
In one sentence

In Fang v. U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, Judge Swain ordered payment or an IFP application within 30 days before processing the case.

Who this affects

Mei Fang, who must either pay the required fees or submit an IFP application within 30 days for the case to proceed.

What happened

Mei Fang brought Fang v. U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services without a lawyer but did not pay the required fees or submit an application to proceed without prepaying them.

The court ordered Fang, within 30 days, to pay $405 or submit a signed application to proceed without prepaying fees. No summons would issue at that time, and the action would be dismissed if Fang did not comply.

Judge Laura Taylor Swain also certified that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied permission to proceed without prepaying fees for an appeal.

The detailed version

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

Case
Fang v. U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services · No. 1:24-cv-01851
Judge
Laura Swain
Date
Mar. 14, 2024

Background

Mei Fang brought this action without a lawyer. The complaint was submitted without the required filing and administrative fees and without an application to proceed without prepaying fees, commonly called an IFP application.

Order

The court ordered Fang to do one of two things within 30 days of the order: pay $405 in fees, consisting of a $350 filing fee and a $55 administrative fee, or submit a signed IFP application. If the court grants the application, Fang may proceed without prepaying the fees.

No summons would issue at that time. If Fang complied, the Clerk’s Office would process the case under its procedures. If Fang failed to comply within the allowed period, the action would be dismissed.

Appeal

The court certified that any appeal from the order would not be taken in good faith and denied IFP status for purposes of an appeal. The order did not address the merits of Fang’s underlying claims against U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services.

The authoritative version

Read the full 4-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.