Satchell v. Molina

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT ELECTRONICALLY FILED DOC #: _________________ SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK DATE FILED: 5/19/2025 ----------------------------------------------------------------- X : JOHN SATCHELL, : : Plaintiff, : 1:23-cv-11119-GHW : -v- : ORDER : CITY OF NEW YORK, et al., : : Defendants. : : ------------------------------------------------------------------ X GREGORY H. WOODS, United States District Judge: The Court received Plaintiff’s letter postmarked May 12, 2025. Dkt. No. 41. Plaintiff’s letter appears to constitute a new complaint raising class action claims. The letter also realleges the allegations raised in Plaintiff’s numerous previous letters. The Court refers Plaintiff to its order dated April 28, 2025, Dkt. No. 37, in which the Court denied Plaintiff’s motion to certify a class. See Ackers v. U.N., No. 05-cv-1200 (FB), 2005 WL 806592, at *1 n.1 (E.D.N.Y. Apr. 8, 2005) (“[A] class action cannot be maintained by pro se litigants.”); Iannaccone v. Law, 142 F.3d 553, 558 (2d Cir.1998) (“[B]ecause pro se means to appear for one’s self, a person may not appear on another person’s behalf in the other’s cause.”). In its April 28, 2025 order, the Court also told Plaintiff that if he wishes to amend his complaint with new or additional allegations, he must request permission to file an amended complaint. Dkt. No. 37 at 2. Plaintiff has not moved for, and the Court has not granted him leave to, amend his complaint. Further, Plaintiff’s most recent letter complaint simply re-raises the same allegations contained in his previous letters. For these reasons, the Court does not accept this filing as an amended complaint. Plaintiff is directed, if he so chooses, to file a letter opposing the City of New York’s motion to dismiss, filed on April 28, 2025. As ordered in the Court’s April 21, 2025 order, Dkt. No. 35, Plaintiff has until four weeks from the date of service of the City’s motion to file his opposition. The Clerk of Court is directed to mail a copy of this order, the order at Dkt. No. 37, and the documents at Dkt. Nos. 38 and 39 to Plaintiff by certified mail. SO ORDERED. Dated: May 19, 2025 New York, New York H. WOODS United States District Judge