Henry Williams v. Regional Transit Service, Inc., et al.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK HENRY WILLIAMS, Plaintiff, ORDER vs. 25-CV-6485-MAV REGIONAL TRANSIT SERVICE, INC., et al., Defendants.

Before the Court is pro se Plaintiff Henry Williams’ amended complaint for screening. ECF No. 28; 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B). The Court had previously granted Plaintiffs motion to proceed in forma pauperis, and after liberally construing Plaintiffs original compliant, amended complaint, and motion for leave to further amend, ECF Nos. 1, 18, 20, as his original collective complaint, Plaintiffs claims were dismissed with limited leave to amend. See ECF No. 22.

Plaintiffs April 27, 2026 amended complaint raises three 42 U.S.C. § 1983 claims against the following named Defendants: Regional Transit Service, Inc., Rochester-Genesee Regional Transportation Authority, Miguel Velazquez, Jay Corey, Donna Schnapp, Jason Palvino, and Daniel DeLaus. ECF No. 23.

After screening Plaintiffs April 2026 amended complaint using the 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2) criteria, the Court will allow the matter to proceed to service. See, e.g., Ahmad v. City of New York, No. 25-CV-4166 (PAE) (VF), 2025 WL 3088981, at *1 (S.D.N.Y. Nov. 5, 2025) (‘the IFP statute presents an extremely high bar for sua sponte dismissal for failure to state a claim”). The Court’s decision in this regard does not suggest any view on whether Plaintiffs claims could survive a motion to dismiss.

See McFadden v. Noeth, 827 F. App’x 20, 30 (2d Cir. 2020) (reversing district court’s sua sponte dismissal at the IFP-screening stage but noting that “we have not asserted nor intimated any view on whether the various claims asserted by [plaintiff] could survive a motion to dismiss’).

The Clerk of the Court is directed to file Plaintiffs papers, to ensure the docket reflects all seven named Defendants, and to cause the United States Marshal to serve copies of the Summons, Amended Complaint (ECF No. 23), and this Order upon the named Defendants without Plaintiffs payment therefor, unpaid fees to be recoverable if this action terminates by monetary award in Plaintiffs favor.

SO ORDERED.

Dated: May _._, 2026 Rochester, New York Cf issadl th VLE HON. MEREDITH A. VACCA United States District Judge