UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK DANIELLE JOHNSON, Plaintiff, 25-CV-3184 (LTS) -against- ORDER GRAPHITE SOLUTIONS, INC., Defendant. LAURA TAYLOR SWAIN, Chief United States District Judge: Plaintiff brought this action pro se. By order dated June 18, 2025, the Court dismissed the complaint for Plaintiff’s failure to pay the filing fees or submit an application to proceed in forma pauperis. (ECF 6.) The Clerk of Court entered judgment on June 20, 2025. (ECF 7.) On July 16, 2025, Plaintiff refiled the complaint and paid the filing fees. That action was assigned a new docket number and is pending before the Honorable Andrew L. Carter, Jr. of this court. See Johnson v. Graphite Solutions, Inc., No. 25-CV-5978 (ALC) (S.D.N.Y.) (“Johnson I”). On October 31, 2025, Plaintiff filed identical motions in both this action and Johnson I seeking to “consolidate” the two cases. (ECF 11.) By order dated September 22, 2025, in Johnson I, Judge Carter denied Plaintiff’s motion in that case because closed cases are “no longer pending ‘before the court,’” and therefore cannot be consolidated with open cases. See Curtiss v. United States,

, 57 (2d Cir. 2019) (quoting Fed. R. Civ. P. 42(a)); ECF 1:25-CV-5978, 6. The Court denies Plaintiff’s motion to consolidate that was filed in this action for the same reason. This action remains closed. CONCLUSION The Court denies Plaintiff’s motion to consolidate. (ECF 11.) This action remains closed. The Court certifies under

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

(1962) (holding that an appellant demonstrates good faith when he seeks review of a nonfrivolous issue).

SO ORDERED. Dated: October 8, 2025 New York, New York

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