Iotova et al v. Demisa et al
| Antoaneta Iotova and Issac Almaleh |
| Dr. Miller and Dr. Demisa |
| 1:2018cv09700 |
| October 19, 2018 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of New York |
| Louis L Stanton |
| Prisoner: Civil Rights |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on November 15, 2018. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Transmission of Notice of Appeal and Certified Copy of Docket Sheet to US Court of Appeals re: #7 Notice of Appeal. (tp) |
| Appeal Record Sent to USCA (Electronic File). Certified Indexed record on Appeal Electronic Files for #7 Notice of Appeal filed by Issac Almaleh, Antoaneta Iotova were transmitted to the U.S. Court of Appeals. (tp) |
| Filing 7 NOTICE OF APPEAL from #6 Judgment - Sua Sponte (Complaint), #5 Order of Dismissal. Document filed by Issac Almaleh, Antoaneta Iotova. Form D-P is due within 14 days to the Court of Appeals, Second Circuit. (tp) |
| Appeal Fee Due: for #7 Notice of Appeal. Appeal fee due by 11/28/2018. (tp) |
| Appeal Remark as to #7 Notice of Appeal filed by Issac Almaleh, Antoaneta Iotova. IFP DENIED 11/05/2018. (tp) |
| Mailed a copy of #6 Judgment - Sua Sponte (Complaint), #5 Order of Dismissal, to Antoaneta Iotova ID No. 15570104 MDC Brooklyn P.O. Box 329002 Brooklyn, NY 11232; Issac Almaleh ID No. 15569104 MDC Brooklyn P.O. Box 329002 Brooklyn, NY 11232. (aea) |
Filing 6
CIVIL JUDGMENT: Pursuant to the order issued November 5, 2018, dismissing the complaint, IT IS ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that the complaint is dismissed without prejudice under Rule 41(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure for failure to comply with the Court's order. The Court certifies under 28 U.S.C. 1915(a)(3) that any appeal from the Court's judgment would not be taken in good faith. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of Court mail a copy of this judgment to Plaintiff and note service on the docket. (Signed by Judge Louis L. Stanton on 11/5/2018) (Attachments: #1 Appeal Package)(mro) Transmission to Docket Assistant Clerk for processing.
|
|
Filing 5
ORDER OF DISMISSAL: By order dated October 23, 2018, the Court directed Plaintiff Antoaneta Iotova to submit a completed request to proceed in forma pauperis ("IFP") and a prisoner authorization or pay the $400.00 in fees required to file a civil action in this Court. That order specified that failure to comply would result in dismissal of the complaint. Plaintiff has not filed a prisoner authorization or paid the fee; instead she filed a letter asking to be excused from the filing fee. Congress, in enacting the Prison Litigation Reform Act, determined that prisoners shall not be exempt from paying the $350.00 filing fee when proceeding IFP, 28 U.S.C. 1915(b)(1). As set forth in the Court's prior order, a prisoner seeking to proceed in this Court without prepaying fees must therefore authorize the Court to withdraw installment payments from his or her prison account by filing a "prisoner authorization." Accordingly, because Plaintiff has not filed the prisoner authorization as directed, the complaint is dismissed without prejudice. See 28 U.S.C. 1914, 1915. The Clerk of Court is directed to mail a copy of this order to Antoaneta Iotova and Issac Almaleh and note service on the docket. The Court certifies under 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). (Signed by Judge Louis L. Stanton on 11/5/2018) (mro) Transmission to Docket Assistant Clerk for processing.
|
| Filing 4 LETTER from A. Iotova dated 10/27/18 re: MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION/ PLEA FOR INFORMATION. Document filed by Antoaneta Iotova.(sc) |
| Filing 3 APPLICATION TO PROCEED WITHOUT PREPAYING FEES OR COSTS. Document filed by Antoaneta Iotova.(sc) |
| Mailed a copy of #2 Order Directing Payment of Fee or IFP Application & Prisoner Authorization,to Antoaneta Iotova ID No. 15570104 MDC Brooklyn P.O. Box 329002 Brooklyn, NY 11232; Issac Almaleh ID No. 15569104 MDC Brooklyn P.O. Box 329002 Brooklyn, NY 11232. (aea) |
|
Filing 2
ORDER DIRECTING PAYMENT OF FEE OR IFP APPLICATIONS & PRISONER AUTHORIZATION FORMS: Plaintiffs are directed to render payment of the filing fee or submit IFP applications & Prisoner Authorizations to this Court's Pro Se Office within thirty (30) days of the date of this Order. The Clerk of Court is directed to assign this matter to my docket. 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 in forma pauperis status is denied for the purpose of an appeal. See Coppedge v. United States, 369 U.S. 438, 444-45 (1962). Filing Fee due by 11/23/2018. In Forma Pauperis (IFP) Application due by 11/23/2018. Prisoner Authorization Form due by 11/23/2018. (Signed by Judge Louis L. Stanton on 10/23/2018) (Attachments: #1 IFP application, #2 Prisoner Authorization)(keb) Transmission to Docket Assistant Clerk for processing.
|
| NOTICE OF CASE REASSIGNMENT - SUA SPONTE to Judge Louis L. Stanton. Judge Colleen McMahon is no longer assigned to the case. (bcu) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT against Demisa, Miller. Document filed by Antoaneta Iotova, Issac Almaleh. (sac) |
| Case Designated ECF. (sac) |
Access additional case information on PACER
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the New York Southern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
