Felix Daniel Reyes v. Westchester Department of Corrections

S.D. New York

Felix Daniel Reyes v. Westchester Department of Corrections

District Court, S.D. New York·Decided January 20, 2026·No. 1:25-cv-10845·Unknown

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK FELIX DANIEL REYES, Plaintiff, 25-CV-10845 (LTS) -against- ORDER DIRECTING SIGNATURE WESTCHESTER DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, Defendant. LAURA TAYLOR SWAIN, Chief United States District Judge: Plaintiff brings this action pro se. Plaintiff submitted the complaint without a signature. Rule 11(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure provides that “[e]very pleading, written motion, and other paper must be signed by at least one attorney of record in the attorney’s name – or by a party personally if the party is unrepresented.” The Supreme Court has interpreted Rule 11(a) to require “as it did in John Hancock’s day, a name handwritten (or a mark handplaced).” Becker v. Montgomery, 532 U.S. 757, 764 (2001). Plaintiff is directed to submit the signature page of the complaint with an original signature to the Court within 30 days of the date of this order. The signed document must be labeled with docket number 25-CV-10845 (LTS). A copy of the signature page is attached to this order. The Court also notes that Plaintiff’s complaint appears to be incomplete. Specifically, the document received by the court appears to be missing pages three and five of the complaint form. The Court directs Plaintiff, within 30 days, to submit a complete copy of the complaint. No summons shall issue at this time. If Plaintiff complies with this order, the case shall be processed in accordance with the procedures of the Clerk’s Office. If Plaintiff fails to submit a signature, the action will be dismissed. If he fails to file a complete copy of the complaint, the Court will treat the currently docketed complaint as the operative pleading and consider only those facts included in the complaint. 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 appellant demonstrates good faith when seeking review of a nonfrivolous issue). SO ORDERED. Dated: January 20, 2026 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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK FELIX DANIEL REYES, Plaintiff, 25-CV-10845 (LTS) -against- ORDER DIRECTING SIGNATURE WESTCHESTER DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, Defendant. LAURA TAYLOR SWAIN, Chief United States District Judge: Plaintiff brings this action pro se. Plaintiff submitted the complaint without a signature. Rule 11(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure provides that “[e]very pleading, written motion, and other paper must be signed by at least one attorney of record in the attorney’s name – or by a party personally if the party is unrepresented.” The Supreme Court has interpreted Rule 11(a) to require “as it did in John Hancock’s day, a name handwritten (or a mark handplaced).” Becker v. Montgomery, 532 U.S. 757, 764 (2001). Plaintiff is directed to submit the signature page of the complaint with an original signature to the Court within 30 days of the date of this order. The signed document must be labeled with docket number 25-CV-10845 (LTS). A copy of the signature page is attached to this order. The Court also notes that Plaintiff’s complaint appears to be incomplete. Specifically, the document received by the court appears to be missing pages three and five of the complaint form. The Court directs Plaintiff, within 30 days, to submit a complete copy of the complaint. No summons shall issue at this time. If Plaintiff complies with this order, the case shall be processed in accordance with the procedures of the Clerk’s Office. If Plaintiff fails to submit a signature, the action will be dismissed. If he fails to file a complete copy of the complaint, the Court will treat the currently docketed complaint as the operative pleading and consider only those facts included in the complaint. 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 appellant demonstrates good faith when seeking review of a nonfrivolous issue). SO ORDERED. Dated: January 20, 2026 New York, New York

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

Felix Daniel Reyes v. Westchester Department of Corrections, (S.D.N.Y. 2026).

Pincite

Felix Daniel Reyes v. Westchester Department of Corrections (Felix Daniel Reyes v. Westchester Department of Corrections) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related