Pedotti v. Beth Israel Medical Center
- Rochon
- 1:24-cv-02306
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 11
In Holiday Oljii Anna Pedotti, II v. Beth Israel Medical Center, Judge Rochon dismissed the action, denied amendment, and required a response before imposing a filing bar.
Holiday Oljii Anna Pedotti, II, whose action was dismissed and whose future filing access may be restricted; the defendants, who faced no further claims in this action.
What happened
Holiday Oljii Anna Pedotti, II sued Beth Israel Medical Center, the Food and Drug Administration, and the Social Security Administration. Proceeding without a lawyer, she sought damages and an order requiring removal of an alleged artificial-intelligence device that she said was implanted during hospital treatment without her consent.
The court dismissed claims seeking criminal prosecution because a private person cannot require prosecutors to bring criminal charges. It dismissed the remaining claims as frivolous, finding that the complaint provided no plausible factual support for its allegations. The court also denied permission to amend the complaint.
Judge Jennifer L. Rochon ordered Pedotti to submit a declaration within 30 days explaining why the court should not bar her from filing future civil actions in that court without permission. The court has not yet imposed that bar, did not direct the Clerk to enter judgment at this time, and denied fee-free status for any appeal.
The detailed version
- Pedotti v. Beth Israel Medical Center · No. 1:24-cv-02306
- Rochon
- Apr. 16, 2024
Background
Holiday Oljii Anna Pedotti, II brought the action without a lawyer and paid the filing fees. She asserted claims involving alleged medical malpractice and the Federal Tort Claims Act against Beth Israel Medical Center, the Food and Drug Administration, and the Social Security Administration. She sought damages and injunctive relief.
The complaint alleged that, during or after hospitalization at Beth Israel Medical Center, an artificial-intelligence device was implanted in her body without informed consent and caused various physical and other harms. She also appeared to seek criminal prosecution of other people. The opinion states that the court had previously warned Pedotti about filing frivolous or otherwise nonmeritorious civil actions.
Rulings
The court dismissed any claims seeking the criminal prosecution of others for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction. It explained that the decision to prosecute belongs to prosecutors, and that a private plaintiff cannot direct a prosecutor or the court to begin a criminal case.
The court dismissed the remaining claims as frivolous. It found that Pedotti supplied no factual basis supporting her allegations about the implanted device, the treatment, or the resulting injuries. The court characterized the allegations as conclusory, irrational, and unsupported by a factual predicate. The court also denied leave to amend because it found that the defects could not be cured by amendment.
Order to show cause
The court directed Pedotti to submit a written declaration within 30 days explaining why it should not bar her from filing any future civil action in that court without the court’s permission. The court stated that it would impose the filing bar if she failed to submit the declaration on time or failed to show good cause. The order therefore directed her to respond but did not yet impose the filing bar.
Disposition
The court dismissed the action, denied leave to amend, and directed Pedotti to show cause regarding a possible future filing injunction. It directed the Clerk not to enter judgment at that time because the show-cause process remained pending. The court also certified that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied fee-free status for purposes of an appeal.
Read the full 11-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.