Holman v. Family Court et al

Filing 10

ORDER: Plaintiff's motion for an extension of time to appeal (ECF No. 7) is denied as moot. The Court certifies under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal from this order would not be taken in good faith, and therefore IFP status is d enied for the purpose of an appeal. Cf. Coppedge v. United States, 369 U.S. 438, 444-45 (1962) (holding that an appellant demonstrates good faith when he seeks review of a nonfrivolous issue). SO ORDERED denying as moot 7 Motion for Extension of Time to File. (Signed by Judge Colleen McMahon on 12/19/22) (rdz)

Case 1:17-cv-07141-CM Document 10 Filed 12/19/22 Page 1 of 2

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
SERRICE S. HOLMAN, on behalf of her minor
daughters G.H. and S.H,
Plaintiff,

17-CV-7141 (CM)

-against-

ORDER

FAMILY COURT, et al.,
Defendants.
COLLEEN McMAHON, United States District Judge:
By order dated December 14, 2017, the Court dismissed without prejudice Plaintiff’s
complaint for failure to comply with the Court’s October 30, 2017 order (ECF No. 2), directing
Plaintiff to either pay the $400.00 filing fees or submit a completed and signed request to
proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP”), (ECF No. 3.) On February 13, 2018, Plaintiff filed a motion
to reopen the case, and by order dated February 22, 2018, the Court denied Plaintiff’s motion,
(ECF No. 6.)
Six and one-half years later, on July 13, 2022, Plaintiff filed a notice of appeal (ECF No.
8), and a motion for an extension of time to appeal, (ECF No. 7). By Mandate issued on
November 16, 2022, the Second Circuit dismissed Plaintiff’s appeal for lack of jurisdiction.
(ECF No. 9).
Because the Second Circuit issued a decision on Plaintiff’s appeal, the Court dismisses as
moot Plaintiff’s motion for an extension of time to appeal (ECF No. 7).
CONCLUSION
Plaintiff’s motion for an extension of time to appeal (ECF No. 7) is denied as moot.
The Court certifies under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal from this order would
not be taken in good faith, and therefore IFP status is denied for the purpose of an

Case 1:17-cv-07141-CM Document 10 Filed 12/19/22 Page 2 of 2

appeal. Cf. Coppedge v. United States, 369 U.S. 438, 444-45 (1962) (holding that an appellant
demonstrates good faith when he seeks review of a nonfrivolous issue).
SO ORDERED.
Dated:

December 19, 2022
New York, New York
COLLEEN McMAHON
United States District Judge

2