Oates v. City of New York

Full title: JAMES OATES, Plaintiff, -v- CITY OF NEW YORK, et al. Defendants

Court: United States District Court, S.D. New York

Date published: May 12, 2004

02 Civ. 5960 (GEL) (S.D.N.Y. May. 12, 2004)

Opinion

02 Civ. 5960 (GEL)

May 12, 2004

OPINION AND ORDER

GERARD E. LYNCH, District Judge

Plaintiff pro se has requested modification and reversal of the Court's Opinion and Order dated April 2, 2004, dismissing his claims for failure to exhaust administrative remedies. Oates v. City of New York, No. 02 Civ. 5960, 2004 WL 744611 (S.D.N.Y. April 6, 2004). Plaintiff's request is accepted as a motion for reargument under Rule 6.3 of the Local Rules of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, and as a motion to extend time to request reargument.

Plaintiff argues that his claims are exempt from the exhaustion requirement because his claims were non-grievable under the policies of the New York City Department of Correction. Although he did not raise these arguments in his opposition to defendants' original motion, Id. at *1, it is in the interest of justice to allow plaintiff to present, and the government to respond to, his new arguments.

Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED:

1. That plaintiff's motion for an extension of time to request reargument is granted nunc pro tunc and that his request for reargument is granted;

2. That the defendants shall submit a brief response to plaintiff's motion, which shall be limited to 10 pages, no later than June 3, 2004;

SO ORDERED.