Suh v. Dept. of Justice
Andrew Suh |
Dept. of Justice |
1:2022cv04790 |
June 7, 2022 |
US District Court for the Southern District of New York |
Laura Taylor Swain |
Mandamus & Other |
28 U.S.C. ยง 1331 Fed. Question |
None |
Docket Report
This docket was last retrieved on July 22, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
Document Text |
---|
Received returned mail re: #2 Order of Dismissal, #3 Judgment - Sua Sponte (Complaint). Mail was addressed to Young Yil Jo, 1932 E. Washington Blvd., Pasadena, CA 91104 and was returned for the following reason(s): FORWARD TIME EXP RTN TO SEND, USPS: NOT AT THIS ADDRESS SINCE 4/1/2021! RETURN MAIL FROM SDNY REPEATEDLY FOR YEAR! (vn) |
MAILING RECEIPT: Document No: 2-3. Mailed to: Andrew Suh Reg.B72067 2600 N. Brinton Ave Dixon, IL 21021. Mailed To: Young Yil Jo, at 1932 E. Washington Blvd., Pasadena, CA 91104 (dsh) |
Filing 3 CIVIL JUDGMENT: IT IS ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that this action is dismissed without prejudice to any civil action that Andrew Suh may wish to bring in the future. 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 Andrew Suh at the address listed on the court's docket, and to Young Yil Jo, at 1932 E. Washington Blvd., Pasadena, CA 91104, Jo's address of record in In re Young Yil Jo, 1:14-CV-7793 (S.D.N.Y.), and note service on the docket. (Signed by Judge Laura Taylor Swain on 7/6/2022) (Attachments: #1 Pro Se Appeal Package) (sac) |
Filing 2 ORDER OF DISMISSAL: The Court dismisses this action without prejudice to any civil action that Andrew Suh may wish to bring in the future. 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 in forma pauperis status is denied for the purpose of an appeal. See Coppedge v. United States, 369 U.S. 438, 444-45 (1962). The Clerk of Court is directed to mail a copy of this order to Young Yil Jo, at 1932 E. Washington Blvd., Pasadena, CA 91104, his address of record for In re Young Yil Jo, 1:14-CV-7793, and note service on the docket. The Clerk of Court is also directed to mail a copy of this order to the address of Andrew Suh listed on the docket of this action. (Signed by Judge Laura Taylor Swain on 7/6/2022) (sac) |
NOTICE OF CASE REASSIGNMENT - SUA SPONTE to Judge Laura Taylor Swain. Judge Unassigned is no longer assigned to the case. (vba) |
Filing 1 COMPLAINT against Dept. of Justice. Document filed by Andrew Suh. (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
Search for this case: Suh v. Dept. of Justice | |
---|---|
Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
Plaintiff: Andrew Suh | |
Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
Search Finance | [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ] |
Search Web | [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
Defendant: Dept. of Justice | |
Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
Search Finance | [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ] |
Search Web | [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | 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.