Rogers v. U.S. Department of the Treasury

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

MEGAN A. ROGERS, JEBO, HUBERT ROBERS, and PFRIER,

Plaintiffs,

-v- 5:21-CV-1351

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TREASURY – IRS, MARCUS ROGERS, JESSE HAVE, JAYLAN BELLE, AMIRA SHENADLH, KIARU ALTURNET, HILLARY CLINTON, ROGERS FAMILY, NYS FEDERAL COURTHOUSE, SYRACUSE POLICE / COURTS, MISHA MONTREAL, Private Investigator, ST. JOSEPH’S INDIAN SCHOOL, J. ROGET CHAMPAGNE, JOHN BLISS, DANCKS, and LEE CHAPEL, Landmark,

Defendants.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

APPEARANCES: OF COUNSEL:

MEGAN A. ROGERS Plaintiff, Pro Se 229 Duane Street Syracuse, NY 13207

DAVID N. HURD United States District Judge ORDER ON REPORT & RECOMMENDATION

On December 17, 2021, pro se plaintiff1 Megan A. Rogers (“plaintiff”) filed this civil action alleging that defendants violated her rights under, inter alia, Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 1983, the Americans with Disabilities Act, the Age Discrimination in Employment Act, and the implied cause of action set forth in Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of

the Federal Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388 (1971). Dkt. No. 1. Along with her complaint, plaintiff filed motions (1) for leave to proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP Application”) and (2) to appoint counsel. Dkt. Nos. 3, 4. On March 28, 2022, U.S. Magistrate Judge Miroslav Lovric granted

plaintiff’s IFP Application, denied her motion to appoint counsel without prejudice, and advised by Report & Recommendation (“R&R”) that plaintiff’s complaint be dismissed with leave to replead. Dkt. No. 5. As Judge Lovric explained, in its current form plaintiff’s pleading and exhibits left the Court

“unable to meaningfully analyze whether, and to what extent, Plaintiff has pleaded any colorable claim against Defendants.” Id. Plaintiff has filed objections. Dkt. No. 7. Upon de novo review of the portions to which plaintiff has objected, the R&R will be accepted and

adopted in all respects. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C).

1 The pleadings name additional plaintiffs, but is signed only by Megan A. Rogers. Because Rogers is not an attorney, she cannot represent others in federal court. See, e.g., 28 U.S.C. § 1654. Therefore, it is ORDERED that 1. The Report & Recommendation is ACCEPTED; 2. Plaintiff's complaint is DISMISSED with leave to replead; 3. Plaintiff shall have thirty days from the date of this Order in which to amend her pleading in accordance with the instructions set forth in Judge Lovric’s Report & Recommendation and this Order; and 4. If plaintiff does not file an amended complaint within this thirty-day period, the Clerk of the Court shall enter a judgment accordingly and close the file without further Order of this Court. IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: April 21, 2022 PUG Utica, New York. David NfHurd U.S. Disfrict Judge

3.