Khalil

Filing 1

ORDER directing the Clerk to open a miscellaneous matter entitled In re Adil Khalil, and file a copy of this order under that docket number. Any further filings by plaintiff shall be filed only under that miscellaneous docket. The Court will review each filing to determine whether it is frivolous or fails to state a claim. If it is frivolous or fails to state a claim, no further action will be taken. If it states a claim, the Court will direct the Clerk to open a new civil matter in which that document will be filed, and it will proceed as a new case in the ordinary course. Ordered by Judge Brian M. Cogan on 9/18/2019. (Marziliano, August)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
----------------------------------------------------------ADIL KHALIL,
Plaintiff,
- against CITY OF NEW YORK, et al.,
Defendants.
-----------------------------------------------------------

C/M
X
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
X

ORDER
19-cv-4796 (BMC) (ST)

COGAN, District Judge.
Plaintiff pro se brought this action alleging violations of his civil rights. On August 26,
2019, the Court dismissed this case and ordered plaintiff to show cause within 14 days why
plaintiff should not be enjoined from filing further actions in the Eastern District of New York
without first obtaining leave of Court. The Court noted that plaintiff filed six civil rights actions
in the Eastern District of New York within the past three years, and all of these actions have been
dismissed. The Court found that it may be appropriate to restrict plaintiff’s future access to the
judicial system in light of his history of filing vexatious, harassing, and duplicative lawsuits.
Plaintiff’s conduct after the August 26, 2019 order to show cause has only amplified the
Court’s concern that plaintiff will continue to abuse his access to the judicial system. He has not
responded to the order to show cause, but instead has moved for a preliminary injunction and a
temporary restraining order on the basis of the same claims that the Court had already dismissed.
The Court denied this motion on the merits and also because a party cannot obtain a preliminary
injunction in a case that has been dismissed.

Accordingly, plaintiff is enjoined from filing any further actions in the Eastern District of
New York without first obtaining leave of Court. To eliminate the need to write a decision every
time plaintiff makes a frivolous filing (because that would largely defeat the purpose of the
injunction), the injunction shall be implemented as follows. First, the Clerk is directed to open a
miscellaneous matter entitled “In re Adil Khalil,” and file a copy of this order under that docket
number. The matter is then to be administratively closed. Any further filings by plaintiff shall
be filed only under that miscellaneous docket. The Court will review each filing to determine
whether it is frivolous or fails to state a claim. If it is frivolous or fails to state a claim, no further
action will be taken. If it states a claim, the Court will direct the Clerk to open a new civil matter
in which that document will be filed, and it will proceed as a new case in the ordinary course.
The Court certifies pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal 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).
SO ORDERED.

Digitally signed by Brian M.
Cogan

Dated: Brooklyn, New York
September 18, 2019

______________________________________
U.S.D.J.

2