Rodriguez v. Nassau Police Department et al

Filing 13

ORDER - To date, Plaintiff has not filed an Amended Complaint. On July 20, 2018 Plaintiff filed a renewed application for the appointment of pro bono counsel on the Court's form. However, given that Plaintiff received the Court's Electronic Order and has chosen not to file an Amended Complaint as directed, judgment shall now enter and the Clerk of the Court is directed to CLOSE this case and to mail a copy of this Order to the pro se Plaintiff. So Ordered by Judge Joanna Seybert on 10/11/2018. C/M (Valle, Christine)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
----------------------------------X
JOSE RODRIGUEZ,
Plaintiff,
ORDER
18-CV-0203(JS)(AKT)

-againstNASSAU COUNTY POLICE DEPARTMENT,
and JOHN DOE,

Defendants.
----------------------------------X
APPEARANCES
For Plaintiff:
Jose Rodriguez, pro se
18001556
Nassau County Correctional Center
100 Carman Avenue
East Meadow, NY 11554
For Defendants:

No appearances.

SEYBERT, District Judge:
By Memorandum and Order dated June 6, 2018 (the “M&O”),
the Court granted incarcerated pro se plaintiff Jose Rodriguez’s
(“Plaintiff”) application to proceed in forma pauperis, and sua
sponte dismissed the Complaint for failure to state a claim
pursuant

to

28

U.S.C.

§§

1915(e)(2)(B)(ii),

1915A(b)(1).

Plaintiff was granted leave to file an Amended Complaint within
thirty (30) days from the date of the M&O and was cautioned that
his failure to timely file an Amended Complaint would lead to the
entry of judgment and this case would be CLOSED.
On

June

28,

2018,

Plaintiff

filed

a

letter

motion

requesting the appointment of pro bono counsel to represent him in

this case.

By Electronic Order dated July 10, 2018 the Court

denied the letter motion for the appointment of pro bono counsel
without prejudice and with leave to renew upon the proper form.
The Electronic Order also extended the deadline to July 31, 2018
for the filing of the Amended Complaint.

Plaintiff was again

warned that his failure to file an Amended Complaint as directed
would lead to the dismissal of the case.
To date, Plaintiff has not filed an Amended Complaint.
On July 20, 2018 Plaintiff filed a renewed application for the
appointment of pro bono counsel on the Court’s form.

However,

given that Plaintiff received the Court’s Electronic Order and has
chosen not to file an Amended Complaint as directed, judgment shall
now enter and the Clerk of the Court is directed to CLOSE this
case and to mail a copy of this Order to the pro se Plaintiff.
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 any appeal.

See Coppedge v. United States, 369 U.S. 438, 444-

45, 82 S. Ct. 917, 8 L. Ed. 2d 21 (1962).
SO ORDERED.
/s/ JOANNA SEYBERT______
JOANNA SEYBERT, U.S.D.J.
Dated:

October
11 , 2018
Central Islip, New York