Sabet v. Advisory Committee on Rules of Civil Procedures

District Court, S.D. New York

Sabet v. Advisory Committee on Rules of Civil Procedures

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK SAMUEL A. SABET, Plaintiff, 22-CV-2441 (LTS) -against- ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON RULES OF ORDER OF DISMISSAL CIVIL PROCEDURES; SCOTT MYERS, UNDER

28 U.S.C. § 1651

ESQ., Defendants. LAURA TAYLOR SWAIN, Chief United States District Judge: On January 31, 2008, the Court barred Plaintiff from filing any new actions in this District without first obtaining leave to file. See S.A. Godowner v. Footlocker, Inc., No. 07-CV- 11042 (KMW) (S.D.N.Y. Jan. 31, 2008), appeal dismissed, No. 08-1068-cv (2d Cir. May 29, 2008).1 Plaintiff filed this new pro se action, seeks in forma pauperis status (IFP), and has not sought leave to file from the Court. The Court therefore dismisses this action without prejudice for failure to comply with the January 31, 2008, judgment. All pending motions are terminated. The Court certifies, pursuant to

28 U.S.C. § 1915

(a)(3), that any appeal from this order would not be taken in good faith, and therefore IFP status is denied for the purpose of an appeal. See Coppedge v. United States,

369 U.S. 438, 444-45

(1962).

1 In S.A. Godowner, No. 07-CV-11042 (KMW), Plaintiff sued Footlocker, Inc., under the name “S.A. Godowner.” Plaintiff has previously sued Footlocker, Inc., under the names Sabet and Godowner. See Sabet v. Doe, Owner of Wordmark “Footlocker Inc.,” No. 07-CV-5882 (DAB) (S.D.N.Y. June 21, 2007) (dismissed for failure to state a claim on which relief may be granted); Godowner v. Footlocker, Inc., No. 08-CV-0338 (KMW) (S.D.N.Y. Jan 15, 2008) (voluntarily withdrawn). Plaintiff consents to electronic service. (ECF 3.) SO ORDERED. Dated: March 28, 2022 New York, New York

/s/ Laura Taylor Swain LAURA TAYLOR SWAIN Chief United States District Judge

Reference

Status
Unknown