Lewis v. Wolfe

Filing 7

BAR ORDER UNDER 28 U.S.C. § 1651: The Court hereby bars Plaintiff from filing future civil actions IFP in this court without first obtaining from the court leave to file. See 28 U.S.C. § 1651. Plaintiff must attach a copy of her proposed complaint and a copy of this order to any motion seeking leave to file. The motion must be filed with the Pro Se Intake Unit of this court. If Plaintiff violates this order and files an action without filing a motion for leave to file, the action will be dismissed for failure to comply with this order. Plaintiff is further warned that the continued submission of frivolous documents may result in the imposition of additional sanctions, including monetary penalties. The Clerk is directed to close this action and terminate any motions in this case. 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 IFP status is denied for the purpose of an appea l. Cf. Coppedge v. United States, 369 U.S. 438, 444-45 (1962). The Court directs the Clerk of Court to mail a copy of this order to Plaintiff and note service on the docket. (Signed by Judge Laura Taylor Swain on 11/16/2021) (sac) Transmission to Docket Assistant Clerk for processing. Transmission to Office of the Clerk of Court for processing.

Case 1:21-cv-06949-LTS Document 7 Filed 11/16/21 Page 1 of 2

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
REGINA LEWIS,
Plaintiff,

21-CV-6949 (LTS)

-against-

BAR ORDER UNDER
28 U.S.C. § 1651

CATHERINE O’HAGAN WOLFE,
Defendant.
LAURA TAYLOR SWAIN, Chief United States District Judge:

Plaintiff filed this action pro se. On October 14, 2021, the Court (1) dismissed the action
under the doctrine of judicial immunity and as frivolous, (2) noted that after Plaintiff was barred
under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g), she had filed an additional 26 cases, and (3) ordered Plaintiff, within
thirty days, to show cause by declaration why she should not be barred from filing further actions
in forma pauperis (“IFP”) in this court, without prior permission. Plaintiff filed a declaration on
November 2, 2021, but she does not address why the bar order should not be imposed. She
instead reasserts her claims against Defendant. Accordingly, the bar order will issue.
CONCLUSION
The Court hereby bars Plaintiff from filing future civil actions IFP in this court without
first obtaining from the court leave to file. See 28 U.S.C. § 1651. Plaintiff must attach a copy of
her proposed complaint and a copy of this order to any motion seeking leave to file. The motion
must be filed with the Pro Se Intake Unit of this court. If Plaintiff violates this order and files an
action without filing a motion for leave to file, the action will be dismissed for failure to comply
with this order.
Plaintiff is further warned that the continued submission of frivolous documents may
result in the imposition of additional sanctions, including monetary penalties. See id. The Clerk
is directed to close this action and terminate any motions in this case.

Case 1:21-cv-06949-LTS Document 7 Filed 11/16/21 Page 2 of 2

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 IFP status is denied for the purpose of an appeal.
Cf. Coppedge v. United States, 369 U.S. 438, 444-45 (1962).
The Court directs the Clerk of Court to mail a copy of this order to Plaintiff and note
service on the docket.
SO ORDERED.
Dated:

November 16, 2021
New York, New York
/s/ Laura Taylor Swain
LAURA TAYLOR SWAIN
Chief United States District Judge

2