Opinion
20-CV-10208 (LGS) (KHP)
10-07-2022
LISE RUBIN, Plaintiff, v. NEW YORK CITY BOARD OF EDUCATION, et al., Defendants.
ORDER
KATHARINE H. PARKER, UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE.
As discussed at the October 6, 2022 pre-motion conference:
Plaintiff's motion for sanctions against Defendants is premature at this time. A motion for sanctions may be revisited after the Court has made a ruling on the Motion to Dismiss. The Clerk of the Court is respectfully requested to terminate the motion at ECF No. 211.
Plaintiff's request at ECF No. 225 to file under seal medical information related to a request for an accommodation is granted. Plaintiff may file a request for a reasonable accommodation and related medical information under seal. The request for an accommodation shall be filed in the form of a letter to the Court of no more than two pages, and the letter shall clearly state what accommodation Plaintiff is requesting, and why such an accommodation is needed. The Clerk of the Court is respectfully requested to terminate the motion at ECF No. 225.
The Court is dedicated to ensuring that all qualified individuals with disabilities have equal and full access to the judicial system. Any person with a bona fide disability, as defined by the Americans with Disabilities Act (the ADA), may request a reasonable accommodation to participate in a court proceeding or other court service. Depending on the circumstances, reasonable accommodations may include, for example, the provision of assistive listening devices or qualified sign language interpreters for a person who is deaf or hard of hearing; provision of copies of court documents in large print, Braille, screen readable, or audio formats for a person who is blind or has low vision; relocating a proceeding to a physically accessible courtroom for a person with a mobility impairment; permitting the use of a service animal; and/or making reasonable modifications to courtroom practices as needed.
Additionally, as the Court explained at the Conference, the Court has not yet made any ruling on the Motion to Dismiss. Accordingly, the Motion at ECF No. 227, which seeks to challenge the Court's “reliance” on Defendant's motion to dismiss opening brief, is premature. Once this Court issues a Report and Recommendation on the Motion to Dismiss, if either party has any objections to the Report and Recommendation, they may raise such objections to Judge Schofield. As such, the Clerk of the Court is respectfully requested to terminate the motion at ECF No. 227.
Finally, in response to Plaintiff's recent letter motion at ECF No. 229, the Court notes to Plaintiff that it is not appropriate for the Court to provide Plaintiff with legal advice. To the extent Plaintiff has any questions regarding any documents she receives from Defendants or others, or regarding how to respond to any motions, or regarding her case in general, Plaintiff may seek legal advice free of charge from the NYLAG clinic.
SO ORDERED.