Gentile v. Annucci

District Court, S.D. New York·Decided February 7, 2022·No. 7:21-cv-03405·Unknown

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT (Geir payed SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK Vesta JOSEPH J. GENTILE, oni espn Ee Plaintiff, v. ACTING COMMISSIONER ANTHONY J. ORDER ANNUCCI; SUPERINTENDENT EDWARD BURNETT; DEP. OF PROGRAMS JOHN 21 CV 3405 (VB) 2 / WOOD; ASST DEP. OF PROGRAMS LUIS To GONZALES; and L.M.S.W. FUEZ, : Copio(M ailga/t axed □ Defendants. . Chamb Sf Vincent L. Briccettt .

On February 7, 2022, the Court received the attached letter from plaintiff, who is incarcerated and proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis. Plaintiff states, “I move to withdraw the above mentioned action.” The Court construes plaintiff's letter as a notice of voluntary dismissal without prejudice pursuant to Rule 41(a)(1)(A)qi). The notice is so ordered and the case is DISMISSED. All deadlines, scheduled conferences, or other scheduled court appearances are cancelled. Any pending motions are moot. The Court certifies pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(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. See Coppedge v. United States, 369 U.S. 438, 444-45 (1962). Chambers will mail a copy of this Order to plaintiff at the address on the docket. The Clerk is instructed to close the case. Dated: February 7, 2022 White Plains, NY SO ORDERED:

Vincent L. Briccetti United States District Judge

ay oo J (| Wye □□ = 7 eZ | VINCENTE BRIGGETTI _UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE Febuary | IQKé Ie” Gentle Vv. Anaucei” 2 /-CV-'"3705( VB JO Mor: srg ble Vue o Vineen t “Bey petty Mo + re SNect Sul IRE nor lL s¥ ho kenw the gbhove Mentien achonw Re cg fg FF

Josaqh . Gentile =

cc. Gee on ©. fre A be a ) her: [. Lr of A lO00 Ss

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

Gentile v. Annucci, (S.D.N.Y. 2022).

Gentile v. Annucci (Gentile 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)