Ramani v. Haley

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 his proposed co mplaint 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 wi ll 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 of Court 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 o f an appeal. Cf. Coppedge v. United States, 369 U.S. 438, 444-45 (1962). The Clerk of Court is directed to enter judgment in this case. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Laura Taylor Swain on 11/21/2024) (sgz) Transmission to Orders and Judgments Clerk for processing.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
VALMIKI RAMANI,
Plaintiff,
24-CV-5747 (LTS)

-against-

BAR ORDER UNDER
28 U.S.C. § 1651

NIKI RANDAWA HALEY, FORMER
REPUBLICATION PRESIDENTIAL
CANDIDATE,
Defendant.
LAURA TAYLOR SWAIN, Chief United States District Judge:

Plaintiff filed this action pro se alleging a “theft of intellectual property” claim. (ECF 1.)
By order dated October 28, 2024, the Court: (1) dismissed this action as frivolous; (2) noted that
of the 11 other complaints Plaintiff filed in this district, one was dismissed on immunity grounds
and 10 were transferred to other jurisdictions and dismissed by the transferee courts for failure to
state a claim, lack of subject matter jurisdiction, or both; and (3) also noted that Plaintiff had
been previously warned that a prefiling injunction could be imposed upon him if he persisted in
filing complaints alleging nonmeritorious intellectual property claims or other frivolous
litigation. (ECF 5) (listing cases). The Court ordered Plaintiff to show cause by declaration why
he should not be barred from filing further actions in forma pauperis (“IFP”) in this Court
without prior permission. Plaintiff filed a declaration on November 16, 2024, but his arguments
against imposing the bar order are insufficient. (ECF 6.) 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
his 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
of Court 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 appeal.
Cf. Coppedge v. United States, 369 U.S. 438, 444-45 (1962).
The Clerk of Court is directed to enter judgment in this case.
SO ORDERED.
Dated:

November 21, 2024
New York, New York
/s/ Laura Taylor Swain
LAURA TAYLOR SWAIN
Chief United States District Judge

2