Crane v. Annucci

District Court, S.D. New York·Decided January 16, 2024·No. 1:23-cv-06912·Unknown

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK MICHAEL A. CRANE, Plaintiff, 23-CV-6912 (LTS) -against- ORDER OF DISMISSAL COMMISSIONER ANTHONY ANNUCCI, et al., Defendants. LAURA TAYLOR SWAIN, Chief United States District Judge: By order dated October 4, 2023, the Court granted Plaintiff 60 days’ leave to file an amended complaint. On November 20, 2023, following Plaintiff’s request for an extension of time, the Court granted him an additional 30 days to file an amended pleading. The October 4, 2023 order specified that failure to comply would result in dismissal of the complaint. Plaintiff has not filed an amended complaint. Accordingly, the complaint, filed in forma pauperis (“IFP”) under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(1), is dismissed under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii). 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). The Court directs the Clerk of Court to enter judgment in this action. SO ORDERED. Dated: January 16, 2024 New York, New York

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

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Crane v. Annucci, (S.D.N.Y. 2024).

Crane v. Annucci (Crane v. Annucci) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Coppedge v. United States
369 U.S. 438 (Supreme Court, 1962)