Higgins v. Blinken

District Court, S.D. New York

Higgins v. Blinken

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK HIGGINS FAMILY TRUST, ET AL., Plaintiffs, 22-CV-9714 (LTS) -against- ORDER OF DISMISSAL ANTONY BLINKIN, ET AL., Defendants. LAURA TAYLOR SWAIN, Chief United States District Judge: By order dated November 16, 2022, the Court directed Plaintiff, within thirty days, to submit a completed request to proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP application”) or pay the $402.00 in fees required to file a civil action in this court. That order specified that failure to comply would result in dismissal of the complaint. Plaintiff has not filed an IFP application or paid the fees. Instead, he raises various objections, none of which can be sustained. Accordingly, the complaint is dismissed without prejudice for Plaintiffs failure to comply with the Court’s order. See

28 U.S.C. §§ 1914

, 1915.1 The Court certifies under

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. Cf. Coppedge v. United States,

369 U.S. 438, 444-45

(1962) (holding that an appellant demonstrates good faith when he seeks review of a nonfrivolous issue). Judgment shall issue. Dated: December 19, 2022 New York, New York

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

1 See United States v. Rodgers,

101 F.3d 247, 252

(2d Cir. 1996) (deeming a notice of appeal from a nonfinal order to be “premature” and a “nullity,” and holding that it did not divest the district court of jurisdiction).

Reference

Status
Unknown