Opinion
24-CV-00072 (LTS)
01-05-2024
MARK C. CHRISTENSON, Plaintiff, v. MARC SMITH, ET AL., Defendants.
ORDER OF DISMISSAL UNDER 28 U.S.C. § 1651
LAURA TAYLOR SWAIN, CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
On June 20, 2018, Plaintiff was barred from filing any new action in forma pauperis (“IFP”) without first obtaining from the Court leave to file. See Christenson v. Roe, ECF 1:18-CV-3319, 3 (S.D.N.Y. June 20, 2018). Plaintiff files this new pro se case, but he does not seek leave to proceed IFP nor does he pay the filing fees. The Court assumes for the purpose of this order that he seeks to proceed IFP. Because Plaintiff has not sought leave of the Court to file, the Court dismisses this action without prejudice for Plaintiff's failure to comply with the June 20, 2018 order.
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) (holding that an appellant demonstrates good faith when he seeks review of a nonfrivolous issue).
The Clerk of Court is directed to enter judgment in this case.
SO ORDERED.