Pilco v. United States Department of Justice Executive Office for Immigration…
Pilco v. United States Department of Justice Executive Office for Immigration Review
- Laura Swain
- 1:23-cv-10051
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Pilco v. United States Department of Justice Executive Office for Immigration Review, Judge Swain dismissed the complaint without prejudice for failure to prosecute.
Diego Pilco’s complaint was dismissed without prejudice, and permission to appeal without paying filing fees was denied.
What happened
In Pilco v. United States Department of Justice Executive Office for Immigration Review, the court had given Diego Pilco 60 days to file an amended complaint. After a court order was returned, the court directed him to provide a new mailing address within 30 days.
Pilco did not provide a new address or file an amended complaint. The court dismissed his complaint without prejudice, meaning he was not barred from seeking to reopen the matter under the procedure described in the order.
Judge Laura Taylor Swain also ruled that any appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied permission to appeal without paying the filing fees. She directed the Clerk of Court to enter judgment.
The detailed version
- Pilco v. United States Department of Justice Executive Office for Immigration… · No. 1:23-cv-10051
- Laura Swain
- Mar. 20, 2024
Background
On January 16, 2024, the court gave Plaintiff Diego Pilco 60 days to file an amended complaint. That order was returned to the court on February 12, 2024. On February 15, 2024, the court directed Pilco to provide a new mailing address in writing within 30 days.
Pilco did not notify the court of a change of address and did not file an amended complaint. The opinion does not describe the claims in the original complaint.
Ruling
The court dismissed Pilco’s complaint without prejudice under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b) for failure to prosecute. This rule allows a court to dismiss a case when a plaintiff does not move the case forward. The court stated that, if Pilco intends to proceed, he may file a motion asking the court to reconsider the dismissal and attach his amended complaint.
The court also certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that an appeal would not be taken in good faith. It therefore denied permission to appeal without paying the required filing fees. The court directed the Clerk of Court to enter judgment.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.