Guess v. Jahromi et al

Filing 10

ORDER finding as moot 8 Motion to Amend or Correct; finding as moot 8 Motion for Hearing; finding as moot 8 Motion ; finding as moot 9 Motion ; finding as moot 9 Motion to Stay. For the same reasons as stated in Guess III, 2016 WL 6695 875, at *1-2, the Court certifies, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3), that any appeal from this Decision and Order would not be taken in good faith. This case is to remain closed. The Clerk of the Court is instructed to refuse to accept any fut ure filings by plaintiff in the cases of Guess I, No. 6:11-CV-06473, Guess II, No. 6:16-CV-06637, and Guess III, No. 6:17-CV-06121, without first obtaining approval from this Court.. Signed by Hon. Michael A. Telesca on 4/26/17. (JMC)-CLERK TO FOLLOW UP-

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

REGINA GUESS,
Plaintiff,
-vs-

No. 6:17-CV-06121(MAT)
DECISION AND ORDER

DR. BABAK S. JAHROMI,
CYNTHIA A. ZINK,
SUSAN A. MOODY,
Defendants.

I.

Background
Plaintiff Regina Guess (“plaintiff”), proceeding pro se, has

filed three actions alleging claims relating to her employment with
the University of Rochester Medical Center. The first, which
alleged claims of discrimination and retaliation in violation of
the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”), was dismissed by this
Court

on

August

17,

2015,

in

a

Decision

and

Order

granting

defendant URMC’s motion for summary judgment. See Guess v. Univ. of
Rochester,

2015

WL

4891377,

*1

(W.D.N.Y.

Aug.

17,

2015),

reconsideration denied, 2015 WL 5824854 (W.D.N.Y. Oct. 6, 2015),
appeal dismissed (2d Cir. 15-3325) (Dec. 30, 2015) (Guess I).
Plaintiff’s second action was dismissed with prejudice by Decision
and Order of this Court dated October 20, 2016. See Guess v.
Jahromi, No. 6:16-CV-06637 (MAT), Doc. 8 (October 20, 2016) (Guess
II). The instant action was likewise dismissed with prejudice by
Decision and Order dated March 21, 2017. See Guess v. Jahromi, 2017
WL 1063474 (Mar. 21, 2017) (Guess III).

II.

Discussion
In the course of these three actions, plaintiff has filed

numerous motions for reconsideration and other relief which have
been denied by the Court since the motions uniformly lacked merit.
The most recent motion for reconsideration, filed by plaintiff on
March 27, 2017, was denied by text order of this Court dated
April 21, 2017. Plaintiff now files two additional motions, in
which

she

requests

various

forms

of

relief

including

reconsideration, a hearing or a court conference, and permission to
file an appeal in her original case, Guess I.1 Plaintiff’s motions
(docs. 8, 9) are denied as moot as this case is closed.
The court hereby advises plaintiff that each of her prior
three actions, including the instant case, are closed and instructs
her not to file further frivolous motions in this case or the
associated cases of Guess I, No. 6:11-CV-06473 and Guess II,
No. 6:16-CV-06637. Plaintiff is also advised that future filing of
frivolous motions in these matters, as well as future filing of any
new matter involving the same facts or claims as the three prior
cases, may result in sanctions. See Chambers v. NASCO, Inc., 501
U.S. 32 (1991) (district court has inherent authority to sanction
parties appearing before it for acting in bad faith, vexatiously,
or wantonly); Sassower v. Field, 973 F.2d 75, 80–81 (2d Cir. 1992)
(upholding sanctions against vexatious pro se litigant). The Clerk
1

The Court notes that the Second Circuit Court of Appeals dismissed
plaintiff’s appeal in that case on December 30, 2015. See Guess I, 2015 WL
5824854, appeal dismissed (2d Cir. 15-3325).

2

of the Court is instructed to refuse to accept any future filings
by plaintiff in the cases of Guess I, No. 6:11-CV-06473, Guess II,
No. 6:16-CV-06637, and Guess III, No. 6:17-CV-06121, without first
obtaining approval from this Court.
III. Conclusion
For the reasons stated above, plaintiff’s motions (docs. 8, 9)
are denied as moot. For the same reasons as stated in Guess III,
2016

WL

6695875,

at

*1-2,

the

Court

certifies,

pursuant

to

28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3), that any appeal from this Decision and
Order would not be taken in good faith. This case is to remain
closed. The Clerk of the Court is instructed to refuse to accept
any future filings by plaintiff in the cases of Guess I, No. 6:11CV-06473, Guess II, No. 6:16-CV-06637, and Guess III, No. 6:17-CV06121, without first obtaining approval from this Court.
ALL OF THE ABOVE IS SO ORDERED.
S/Michael A. Telesca
HON. MICHAEL A. TELESCA
United States District Judge
Dated:

April 26, 2017
Rochester, New York.

3