Lynch v. Bharara et al
Case Number: 1:2019cv03572
Filed: August 21, 2019
Court: US District Court for the Southern District of New York
Office: Foley Square Office
Nature of Suit: Prisoner: Prison Condition
Cause of Action: 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
RSS Follow case documents by RSS

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed Document Text
June 22, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 92 MEMORANDUM ORDER granting in part and denying in part 82 Motion for Reconsideration. For the foregoing reasons, Plaintiff's Motion for Reconsideration is granted to the extent it seeks an award of Plaintiff's costs incurred in this action, in the amount of $401.89, and is otherwise denied. Defendant shall reimburse Plaintiff's costs within thirty days of the date of this Memorandum Order. This Memorandum Order resolves docket entry no. 82. SO ORDERED. Copy mailed by chambers to: Plaintiff John Smith. (Signed by Judge Laura Taylor Swain on 6/22/2022) Copies Mailed By Chambers. (vfr)
May 23, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 89 ORDER: The Court has received Plaintiff's reply submission dated May 16, 2022, filed in support of his pending motion for reconsideration. Plaintiff's reply submission contains his unredacted name, address, and other identifying information. For the reasons stated in the Court's sealed order dated January 8, 2020, the Court will file a copy of Plaintiff's reply submission, with Plaintiff's name, address, and other identifying information redacted, on the public docket, and will file the original, unredacted submission under seal. Chambers will mail a copy of this Order to Plaintiff. SO ORDERED. Copy mailed to: Plaintiff John Smith. (Signed by Judge Laura Taylor Swain on 5/23/2022) Copies Mailed By Chambers. (vfr)
May 2, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 88 ORDER: On March 9, 2022, Plaintiff, who is proceeding pro se, filed a motion for reconsideration (docket entry no. 82) of the Court's Memorandum Order dated February 9, 2022 (docket entry no. 76), and Judgment entered on February 10, 2022 (docket entry no. 79). On March 21, 2022, Defendant filed an opposition to that motion (docket entry no. 86), as well as a certificate of service (docket entry no. 87) reflecting service of the opposition on Plaintiff. Plaintiff has not filed a re ply. In light of Plaintiff's pro se status, the Court sua sponte extends Plaintiff's deadline to file any reply in support of his motion for reconsideration to May 16, 2022. Chambers will mail a copy of this Order to Plaintiff. SO ORDERED. Copy mailed to: Plaintiff John Smith. ( Replies due by 5/16/2022.) (Signed by Judge Laura Taylor Swain on 5/2/2022) Copies Mailed By Chambers. (vfr)
March 9, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 81 ORDER: The Court has received Plaintiff's motion for reconsideration and for relief from judgment filed in connection with this Court's Memorandum Order dated February 9, 2022 (docket entry no. 76), and Judgment entered on February 10, 2022 (docket entry no. 79). Plaintiff's motion contains his unredacted name and address, and the exhibits to the motion contain other information which could allow public identification of Plaintiff. For the reasons stated in the Court's seale d order dated January 8, 2020, the Court will file a copy ofPlaintiff's motion, with Plaintiff's name, address, and other identifying information redacted, on the public docket, and will file the original, unredacted motion under seal. The Government shall file its response to Plaintiff's motion by March 23, 2022. Plaintiff shall file his reply, if any, by April 8, 2022. SO ORDERED., ( Responses due by 3/23/2022, Replies due by 4/8/2022.) (Signed by Judge Laura Taylor Swain on 3/09/2022) Copies Mailed By Chambers. (ama)
February 10, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 79 CLERK'S JUDGMENT re: 7 Order 60 Days Amended Complaint, 76 Order on Motion for Summary Judgment, 47 Memorandum & Opinion, in favor of Executive Office for United States Attorneys, United States Marshals Service(USM) against John Smith . It is hereby ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED: That for the reasons stated in the Court's Order dated August 21, 2019, Memorandum Order dated March 29, 2021 and Order dated February 9, 2022, the Court dismisses Plaintiff's claims against Preet Bharara, Nola Heller, and Robert Johnson pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i), (ii), (iii). The Court dismisses Plaintiff's claims against Anthony Ricco for failure to state a claim on which relief can be granted. 28 U.S.C . § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii). The Court dismisses Plaintiff's claims against the SDNY as barred under the doctrine of sovereign immunity. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii), (iii). The Court dismisses Plaintiff's claims against the State of N ew York as barred by the Eleventh Amendment. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii), (iii). The Court dismisses Plaintiff's claims against J. Guccione, D. Schriro, E. Bailey, R. Cripps, and the G.E.O Detention Facility for failure to state a claim o n which relief can be granted. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii). The USMS's motion for summary judgment is granted, and the EOUSA's renewed motion for summary judgment is granted; accordingly, this case is closed. (Signed by Clerk of Court Ruby Krajick on 2/10/2022) (Attachments: # 1 Notice of Right to Appeal) (dt) . Copies mailed by Chambers.
February 9, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 76 ORDER granting 51 Motion for Summary Judgment. For the foregoing reasons, the EOUSA's renewed motion for summary judgment is granted. This Memorandum Order resolves docket entry no. 51. The Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to enter ju dgment in accordance with this Memorandum Order, the Court's Memorandum Order dated March 29, 2021 (docket entry no. 47), and the Court's sealed Order to Amend dated August 21, 2019 (docket entry no. 7), and to close this case. SO ORDERED.. (Signed by Judge Laura Taylor Swain on 2/9/2022) Copies Mailed By Chambers. (js) Transmission to Orders and Judgments Clerk for processing.
December 9, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 74 ORDER: The Court has received a letter from Plaintiff, mailed November 30, 2021 (docket entry no. 73), reporting that he received the docket sheet mailed to him by the Clerk of Court on November 19, 2021, in an envelope addressed to "John Smi th," Plaintiff's pseudonym in this action. Plaintiff requests that, in the future, envelopes with mailings from the Court be addressed to his real name, rather than to his pseudonym, in order to ensure that prison officials deliver the ma il to him and do not return it as undeliverable. Plaintiff is advised that the Court mails him copies of orders, addressed to his real name on the exterior envelope, directly from Chambers. (See e.g., docket entry nos. 63, 68, 70.) The November 19 , 2021, mailing containing a copy of the docket sheet was mailed by the Clerk of Court (which automatically processes and fulfills requests from pro se parties for copies of docket sheets by mailing those copies to the name listed on the public doc ket), rather than from Chambers. In order to avoid problems of this nature going forward, Plaintiff should address any request for updates as to the status of this action to Chambers, rather than to the Clerk of Court. For the reasons stated in the Court's sealed order dated January 8, 2020, the Court has restricted access to Plaintiff's letter, which contains Plaintiff's unredacted name and address, to Court users only; will file a copy of that letter with Plaintiff's nam e and address redacted on the public docket; and will file the complete, unredacted letter under seal. Chambers will mail a copy of this Order to Plaintiff. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Laura Taylor Swain on 12/9/2021) Copies Mailed By Chambers. (mml)
November 19, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 70 ORDER: The Court has received a letter from Plaintiff, dated November 7, 2021, asking whether the Court has issued a decision on Defendant's second motion for summary judgment (docket entry no. 51). Plaintiff previously wrote to the Court with the same question (docket entry no. 67); it appears that Plaintiff may not have received the Court's Order dated (and mailed to him on) September 17, 2021 (docket entry no. 68), responding to that question. Plaintiff is advised that Def endant's second motion for summary judgment remains pending. The Court will mail a copy of its decision on that motion to Plaintiff once a decision is issued. For the reasons stated in the Court's sealed order dated January 8, 2020, the Court has restricted access to Plaintiff's letter, which contains Plaintiff's unredacted name and address, to Court users only; will file a copy of that letter with Plaintiff's name and address redacted on the public docket; and will file the complete, unredacted letter under seal. Chambers will mail a copy of this Order, and of the Court's Order dated September 17, 2021, to Plaintiff. (Signed by Judge Laura Taylor Swain on 11/19/2021) (js)
September 17, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 68 ORDER re: 51 SECOND MOTION for Summary Judgment . filed by Executive Office for United States Attorneys, 67 Letter, filed by John Smith. The Court has received a letter from Plaintiff, dated September 10, 2021, asking whether the Court has issued a decision on Defendant's second motion for summary judgment (docket entry no. 51.) Plaintiff is advised that Defendant's second motion for summary judgment remains pending. The Court will mail a copy of its decision on that motion to Plaintiff once a decision is issued. For the reasons stated in the Court's sealed order dated January 8, 2020, the Court will file a copy of Plaintiff's letter, with Plaintiff's name and address redacted, on the public docket, and will file the original, unredacted letter under seal. Chambers will mail a copy of this Order, and of the docket sheet, to Plaintiff. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Laura Taylor Swain on 9/17/2021) Copies Mailed By Chambers. (kv)
May 25, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 60 ORDER: The Court has received a letter from Plaintiff, mailed on May 12, 2021, seeking an extension of his May 31, 2021, deadline to file a response to Defendant's renewed motion for summary judgment (docket entry no. 51), to June 21, 2021. P laintiff's application is granted. Plaintiff is directed to file his response to Defendant's renewed motion for summary judgment by June 21, 2021. Defendant is directed to file its reply, if any, by July 9, 2021. For the reasons state d in the Court's sealed order dated January 8, 2020, the Court will file a copy of Plaintiff's letter, with Plaintiff's name and address redacted, on the public docket, and will file the original, unredacted letter under seal. So Ordered. (Responses due by 6/21/2021, Replies due by 7/9/2021.) (Signed by Judge Laura Taylor Swain on 5/25/2021) Copies Mailed By Chambers. (js)
April 9, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 49 ORDER: The Court has received a letter from Plaintiff, dated March 31, 2021, seeking an update as the status of this litigation and of the Court's resolution of Defendants' motion for summary judgment, which the Court resolved in a Memor andum Order (docket entry no. 47) dated (and mailed to Plaintiff on) March 29, 2021. The Court refers Plaintiff to that Memorandum Order, a copy of which is enclosed. For the reasons stated in the Court's sealed order dated January 8, 2020, the Court will file a copy of Plaintiff's letter, with Plaintiff's name and address redacted, on the public docket, and will file the original, unredacted letter under seal. Copy mailed to: Plaintiff John Smith. (Signed by Judge Laura Taylor Swain on 4/9/2021) (nb)
March 29, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 47 MEMORANDUM ORDER re: 27 MOTION for Summary Judgment . filed by United States Marshals Service(USM), United States Attorney(USA). For the foregoing reasons, Defendants' motion for summary judgment is granted to the extent it is brought on behalf of the USMS, and denied without prejudice to renewal to the extent it is brought on behalf of the EOUSA. By April 30, 2021, the EOUSA shall re-conduct its electronic searches for agency records using a broad, uniform selection of search terms,10 and shall file and serve on Plaintiff one or more supplemental declarations describing (and reporting the results of) those searches, and informing the Court of any productions made to Plaintiff as a result. The EOUSA may renew i ts summary judgment motion in connection with such supplemental submission. The Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to terminate the United States Marshals Service as a Defendant, and to terminate the motion at docket entry no. 27., United States Marshals Service(USM) (225 Cadman Plaza E., Brooklyn, NY 11201) terminated. (Signed by Judge Laura Taylor Swain on 3/29/2021) (nb)
November 9, 2020 Opinion or Order Filing 42 ORDER: Plaintiff may file his complete opposition papers to Defendants' motion for summary judgment, including any argument not already presented in Plaintiff's November 4, 2020, memorandum, by December 15, 2020. To the extent Plaintiff see ks to file a cross-motion for summary judgment, he must also make that motion by December 15, 2020. The stay imposed by the Court's Order dated August 27, 2020, is lifted. Chambers will mail a copy of this Order to Plaintiff. And as set forth herein. SO ORDERED., ( Cross Motions due by 12/15/2020., Responses due by 12/15/2020) (Signed by Judge Laura Taylor Swain on 11/09/2020) Copies Mailed By Chambers. (ama)
October 19, 2020 Opinion or Order Filing 38 ORDER: The Court has received pro se plaintiff John Smith's letter dated September 29, 2020, requesting that the Court grant him an extension to respond to defendants' letter and declaration filed on September 11, 2020, supplementing defend ants' motion for summary judgment. (Docket Entry No. 34.)The Court will file plaintiff's letter under seal for substantially the reasons stated in the Court's sealed order dated January 8, 2020, and will provide a copy to counsel for d efendants. Plaintiff's request for an extension of time is granted. Plaintiff may file a response to defendants' September 11, 2020, submission by November 6, 2020. SO ORDERED., ( Responses due by 11/6/2020) (Signed by Judge Laura Taylor Swain on 10/19/2020) Copies Mailed By Chambers. (ama)
September 4, 2020 Opinion or Order Filing 33 ORDER: The Court has received pro se plaintiff John Smith's letter dated August 27, 2020, requesting that the Court grant him a 60-day extension of his deadline to respond to defendants' motion for summary judgment. (Docket Entry No. 27.) T he Court will file plaintiff's letter under seal for substantially the reasons stated in the Court's sealed order dated January 8, 2020, and will provide a copy to counsel for defendants. Plaintiff's request for an extension of time is denied as moot, in light of the Court's Order dated August 27, 2020, which stayed further briefing on defendants' motion for summary judgment pending further order of the Court. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Laura Taylor Swain on 9/04/2020) Copies Mailed By Chambers. (ama)
August 27, 2020 Opinion or Order Filing 32 ORDER: Defendants are directed to file a supplement to their motion for summary judgment, by September 11, 2020, clarifying whether the EOUSA performed any search of its own in response to plaintiff's FOIA request, in addition to forwarding that request to the USMS. If it did not do so, defendants shall provide the Court with any authority permitting a Department of Justice component to satisfy its duty to respond to a FOIA request merely by re-routing that request to another Department of Justice component, pursuant to 28 C.F.R. § 16.4(c), where the request appears to seek documents and information within the custody and control of both components. Alternatively, defendants may seek to withdraw their motion for summary judgment a s to the EOUSA in order to perform a prompt further search for documents responsive to plaintiff's FOIA request. Further briefing on defendants' motion for summary judgment is stayed pending further order of the Court. The Court will addres s a further briefing schedule, as well as plaintiff's request for the appointment of counsel (see Docket Entry No. 31), after receipt of defendants' supplemental submission.The Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to add the Executive Of fice for United States Attorneys as a defendant on the docket sheet of this action, as reflected in the caption above. And as set forth herein. SO ORDERED., Executive Office for United States Attorneys added. (Signed by Judge Laura Taylor Swain on 8/27/2020) Copies Mailed By Chambers. (ama)
August 12, 2020 Opinion or Order Filing 26 ORDER: The Court has received defendant's motion for summary judgment (Docket Entry No. 23), together with its memorandum of law (Docket Entry No. 24), and certificate of service of those filings. (Docket Entry No. 25.) Defendant's motion f ails to comply with Local Civil Rule 56.2, which requires that "[a]ny represented party moving for summary judgment against a party proceeding pro se shall serve and file as a separate document, together with the papers in support of the motion, " the "Notice To Pro Se Litigant Who Opposes a Motion For Summary Judgment" required by that Rule. Defendant shall file and serve the Notice to Pro Se Litigant required by Local Civil Rule 56.2 by August 13, 2020. Defendant shall also promptly file and serve a redacted version of its memorandum of law and exhibits (Docket Entry No. 24)-which includes plaintiff John Smith's identify-redacting plaintiff's name and other personal identifying information. The Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to restrict access to Docket Entry No. 24 to plaintiff and defendant the United States Marshals Service only. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Laura Taylor Swain on 8/12/2020) Copies Mailed By Chambers. (ama)
June 17, 2020 Opinion or Order Filing 18 ORDER: For the reasons stated in the Court's January 8, 2020, sealed order, docket entries numbered 1 to 8 have been sealed and this case is captioned as set forth above. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Laura Taylor Swain on 6/17/2020) Copies Mailed By Chambers. (ama)
August 21, 2019 Opinion or Order Filing 7 ORDER TO AMEND: The Clerk of Court is directed to mail a copy of this order to Plaintiff, and note service on the docket. The Court dismisses Plaintiff's claims against Preet Bharara, Nola Heller, and Robert Johnson pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § ; 1915(e)(2)(B)(i), (ii), (iii). The Court dismisses Plaintiff's claims against Anthony Ricco for failure to state a claim on which relief can be granted. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii). The Court dismisses Plaintiff's claims against t he SDNY as barred under the doctrine of sovereign immunity. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii), (iii). The Court dismisses Plaintiff's claims against the State of New York as barred by the Eleventh Amendment. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii) , (iii). The Court dismisses Plaintiff's claims against J. Guccione, D. Schriro, E. Bailey, R. Cripps, and the G.E.O Detention Facility for failure to state a claim on which relief can be granted. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii). The Court denies Plaintiff's motion to proceed anonymously without prejudice to refile at a later time. Plaintiff is granted leave to file an amended complaint detailing his FOIA claims that complies with the standards set forth above. Plaintiff must su bmit the amended complaint to this Court's Pro Se Intake Unit within sixty days of the date of this order, caption the document as an "Amended Complaint," and label the document with docket number 19-CV-3572 (CM). An Amended Civil R ights Complaint form is attached to this order. No summons will issue at this time. If Plaintiff fails to comply within the time allowed, and he cannot show good cause to excuse such failure, the Court will dismiss the complaint for failure to stat e a claim upon which relief may be granted. The Clerk of Court is directed to docket this as a "written opinion" within the meaning of Section 205(a)(5) of the E-Government Act of 2002. 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). Terminated: R. Crips (A.M.K.C. Warden), G.E.O. Detention Facility, J. Guccione (United States Marshall), N. Heller (Assistant United States Attorney), R. Johnson (Bronx County District Attorney), Antho ny Ricco, D. Schriro (Commissioner of D.O.C.), State of New York, United States District Court, Southern District, E. Bailey (R.N.D.C. Warden) and P. Bharara (United States Attorney). Motions terminated: 6 MOTION REQUEST FOR ANONYMITY, filed by Johnny Lynch. (Signed by Judge Colleen McMahon on 8/21/2019) (sac) Transmission to Docket Assistant Clerk for processing.
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 this case: Lynch v. Bharara et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]

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.

Why Is My Information Online?