Ortiz v. Police Department of the 25th Precinct et al

Filing 60

ORDER granting in part and denying in part 58 Letter Motion to Stay ; granting 58 Letter Motion to Seal. The City's requests are GRANTED IN PART. This matter will remain stayed until Tuesday, March 31, 2020, on which date the City shall f ile a letter advising the Court as to the status of the NYPD administrative trial. The Court confirms that all defendants' time to answer or otherwise respond to the Complaint have been extended sine die. Moreover, Plaintiff's February 7 , 2020 filing at ECF No. 56 has been temporarily restricted and can be viewed only by case participants. The City's request to seal pages 8 and 9 of ECF No. 56 is GRANTED, and the Court will cause those pages to be filed under seal. In additio n, the Court again advises pro se Plaintiff that he is not to file the January 29, 2019 CCRB letter on the public docket, because it is confidential. In any event, the Court is in receipt of the document filed on February 7, 2020 and acknowledges its contents. The Clerk of the Court shall mail this Order to the pro se Plaintiff. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Magistrate Judge Stewart D. Aaron on 2/13/2020) (kgo) Transmission to Docket Assistant Clerk for processing.

2/13/2020

THE CITY OF NEW YORK

LAW DEPARTMENT
100 CHURCH STREET
NEW YORK, NY 10007

JAMES E. JOHNSON
Corporation Counsel

NELSON R. LEESE
Senior Counsel
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Email: [e-mail]

February 13, 2020
VIA ECF
Honorable Stewart D. Aaron
United States Magistrate Judge
United States District Court
Southern District of New York
500 Pearl Street
New York, NY 10007
Re:

Robert J. Ortiz v. Detective Raymond Low, et al.,
19 Civ. 3522 (AJN) (SDA)
LJL

Your Honor:
I am a Senior Counsel in the Office of James E. Johnson, Corporation Counsel of
the City of New York, and the attorney for interested party New York City Corporation Counsel
to the above-referenced case. I respectfully write in response to Your Honor’s January 29, 2020
Order that “the City shall write to the Court a letter as to the status of the NYPD administrative
trial and request a continuation of the stay, if appropriate.” Docket No. 55. 1 The undersigned
communicated with a representative of the CCRB Administrative Prosecution Unit who
confirmed that the NYPD administrative trial concerning this matter remains pending. The
undersigned will continue to comply with any Court Order to provide updates as to the status of
the NYPD administrative trial. Accordingly, the undersigned respectfully requests that all
answers or responses of all individual defendants be held in abeyance until after any future date
set by the Court for the undersigned to write another letter as to the status of the NYPD
administrative trial and request a continuation of the stay, if appropriate.
Additionally, I write to advise Your Honor that the plaintiff has again made a
filing, dated February 7, 2020, (Docket No. 56) attaching materials that the Court previously
found to be confidential and ordered sealed. See Docket Nos. 38 and 55. Accordingly, the
1

Your Honor’s Order directed the undersigned to file this letter on the actual date of
February 17, 2020.
See Docket No. 55.
Monday, February 17, 2020 is
Presidents’ Day/Washington’s Birthday. In an oversight, the undersigned failed to review the
precise deadline for this letter and made plans to travel out of state to visit family this weekend.
I respectfully request that the Court accept this letter today.

undersigned respectfully requests that pages 8 and 9 of Document No. 56 on the docket be filed
under seal for the reasons previously set forth in the Court’s prior Orders granting the City’s
Motion to Seal these documents. The undersigned believes that it is unclear whether the pro se
plaintiff actually re-filed these documents, or if—through some administrative glitch—they were
unknowingly caused to be filed on his behalf. However, the undersigned respectfully requests
that Your Honor again admonish the plaintiff to refrain from continuing to file confidential
materials publicly on the docket. See Docket No. 49.
For the reasons set forth herein, the undersigned respectfully requests that: (1) the
Court continue the stay of the instant action and all presently scheduled appearances and
deadlines—including any deadlines for individual defendants to answer or otherwise respond—
be suspended until after any future date set by the Court for the undersigned to write another
letter as to the status of the NYPD administrative trial; and (2) pages 8 and 9 of Document No.
56 on the docket be filed under seal.
I thank the Court for its time and consideration of this request.
Respectfully submitted,
/s/ Nelson R. Leese
Nelson R. Leese
Senior Counsel
Special Federal Litigation Division
cc:

VIA FIRST CLASS MAIL
Robert J. Ortiz
DIN No. 18-A-3853
Auburn Correctional Facility
P.O. Box 618
Auburn, NY 13021

The City's requests are GRANTED IN PART. This matter will remain stayed until Tuesday, March 31, 2020,
on which date the City shall file a letter advising the Court as to the status of the NYPD administrative
trial. The Court confirms that all defendants' time to answer or otherwise respond to the Complaint have
been extended sine die. Moreover, Plaintiff's February 7, 2020 filing at ECF No. 56 has been temporarily
restricted and can be viewed only by case participants. The City's request to seal pages 8 and 9 of ECF
No. 56 is GRANTED, and the Court will cause those pages to be filed under seal.
In addition, the Court again advises pro se Plaintiff that he is not to file the January 29, 2019 CCRB
letter on the public docket, because it is confidential. In any event, the Court is in receipt of the
document filed on February 7, 2020 and acknowledges its contents.
The Clerk of the Court shall mail this Order to the pro se Plaintiff. SO ORDERED.
Dated: February 13, 2020

-2-