Bowles v. State of New York

Filing 50

BAR ORDER: ORDERED that, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1651(a) and the court's inherent authority to manage its docket so as to prevent abuse in its proceedings, Bowles is BARRED from filing any future pro se mo tion ordocuments in this action without first obtaining leave of the court; and it isfurther ORDERED that, in order to seek leave of the court, Bowles shall forward to the court his request for leave, with the reasons the filing should be per mitted, and a copy of the proposed filing; and it is further ORDERED that Bowles' filing, dated September 2, 2017, (Dkt. No.49) is STRICKEN; and it is further ORDERED that this matter is referred to Chief Judge Glenn T.Suddaby for consideration as to whether an anti-filing injunction shouldissue as to Bowles, the anti-filing injunction enjoining Robert H. Ajamian (Dkt. No. 7, 1:15-af-4) should be amended to include Bowles, or any otheraction the Chief Judge deems appropriate; and it is furtherORDERED that the Clerk shall provide a copy of this Order to Bowles and the Chief Judge. Signed by Senior Judge Gary L. Sharpe on 9/12/2017. (Copy served via regular mail)(jel, ) Modified on 9/12/2017 (jel, ).

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
________________________________
THOMAS E. BOWLES III,
Plaintiff,

1:13-cv-1347
(GLS/ATB)

v.
STATE OF NEW YORK,
Defendant.
________________________________
APPEARANCES:
OF COUNSEL:
FOR THE PLAINTIFF:
Thomas E. Bowles, III
Pro Se
30 Eberle Road
Latham, NY 12110
FOR THE DEFENDANT:
NO APPEARANCE
ORDER
On May 22, 2014, judgment was entered dismissing this action.
(Dkt. No. 13.) For more than a year afterward, plaintiff pro se Thomas E.
Bowles III persisted in filing largely incomprehensible and nonsensical
letters and motions, all of which were either stricken or denied in various
orders. (Dkt. Nos. 15, 19, 20, 22-43.1) After a two-year hiatus, Bowles

1

On several occasions, the court received documents for filing signed by “Robert H.
Ajamian.” (Dkt. Nos. 16, 33, 40, 42, 44.) Ajamian is the subject of an anti-filing injunction,

recently filed a motion to reopen the case, (Dkt. No. 47), which the court
summarily denied, (Dkt. No. 48). Now before the court is yet another
confounding filing. (Dkt. No. 49.)
Bowles’ history of vexatious and frivolous filings is well-documented
in this action. His post-judgment filings have outnumbered his submissions
from commencement to dismissal more than two-fold. Bowles’ conduct is
not without consequence. Although the court would ordinarily permit
Bowles to offer some explanation for his conduct before imposing a leave
to file sanction, the circumstances of this case — the action has been
closed for more than three years and Bowles has been so advised several
times — excuse the need for any such process. In light of the foregoing,
Bowles’ most recent filing, (Dkt. No. 49), is STRICKEN and he is BARRED
from any future filings in this case without prior leave of the court.
Accordingly, it is hereby

which was issued in August 2015. (Dkt. No. 7, 1:15-af-4.) Ajamian and Bowles share the
same penmanship, mailing address, and disregard for the court’s orders, and the court has
little, if any, doubt that Ajamian and Bowles are one in the same. Nonetheless, the anti-filing
injunction identifies only Ajamian as the enjoined party. As a consequence, because of the
likelihood that Bowles is merely an alias for Ajamian and for the same reasons that an antifiling junction was issued as to Ajamian, the court refers this matter to Chief Judge Glenn T.
Suddaby for consideration as to whether an anti-filing injunction should issue as to Bowles, the
order enjoining Ajamian should be amended to include Bowles, or any other action the Chief
Judge deems appropriate.

2

ORDERED that, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1651(a) and the court’s
inherent authority to manage its docket so as to prevent abuse in its
proceedings, Bowles is BARRED from filing any future pro se motion or
documents in this action without first obtaining leave of the court; and it is
further
ORDERED that, in order to seek leave of the court, Bowles shall
forward to the court his request for leave, with the reasons the filing should
be permitted, and a copy of the proposed filing; and it is further
ORDERED that Bowles’ filing, dated September 2, 2017, (Dkt. No.
49) is STRICKEN; and it is further
ORDERED that this matter is referred to Chief Judge Glenn T.
Suddaby for consideration as to whether an anti-filing injunction should
issue as to Bowles, the anti-filing injunction enjoining Robert H. Ajamian
(Dkt. No. 7, 1:15-af-4) should be amended to include Bowles, or any other
action the Chief Judge deems appropriate; and it is further
ORDERED that the Clerk shall provide a copy of this Order to Bowles
and the Chief Judge.
IT IS SO ORDERED.

3

September 12, 2017
Albany, New York

4