Edris v. City of New York et al
| Ahmed Samiraly Edris |
| City of New York and NYPD & DHS |
| 1:2022cv07095 |
| August 19, 2022 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of New York |
| Foley Square Office |
| Gabriel W Gorenstein |
| Lorna G Schofield |
| Prisoner: Civil Rights |
| 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on June 15, 2023. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 15
ORDER granting #13 Letter Motion for Extension of Time to File. Application GRANTED. Defendant's proposed amended briefing schedule is adopted. Defendant shall file its motion by November 18, 2022. Plaintiff may file a response by December 16, 2022, but is not required to do so. The parties' memoranda of law each shall not exceed 25 pages. No reply shall be filed unless requested by the Court. The stay of the deadline to respond to the Complaint and of discovery remains in place. So Ordered. The Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to mail a copy of this Order to the pro se plaintiff. (Signed by Judge Lorna G. Schofield on 10/17/2022) (tg)
|
|
Set/Reset Deadlines: Motions due by 11/18/2022. Responses due by 12/16/2022 (tg)
|
|
Filing 14
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE of Motion to Dismiss Extension Letter, DE#13 served on Ahmed Samiraly Edris on October 14, 2022. Service was made by Mail. Document filed by City of New York..(Lai, Thomas)
|
|
Filing 13
FIRST LETTER MOTION for Extension of Time to File City's motion to dismiss and for the Court to amend the briefing schedule addressed to Judge Lorna G. Schofield from ACC Thomas Lai dated October 14, 2022. Document filed by City of New York..(Lai, Thomas)
|
|
MAILING RECEIPT: Document No: 11-12. Mailed to: Ahmed Samiraly Edris G.P.O. Box 7737 New York, NY 10116. (dsh)
|
|
Filing 12
ORDER DENYING APPLICATION FOR INJUNCTIVE RELIEF: It is hereby ORDERED that the application for injunctive relief against unnamed owners of the relevant storage facilities and unnamed federal law enforcement officials is DENIED, as the requested relief is not sought against Defendants in this case. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 65(d)(2) (providing that any order granting an injunction binds only the parties, their officers and agents, and those in active concert with the parties); United States v. Regan, 858 F.2d 115, 120 (2d Cir. 1988) ("[A] court generally may not issue an order against a nonparty."). It is further ORDERED that the application for injunctive relief against Defendant New York City Police Department is DENIED, as it is not based on the claims at issue in this lawsuit. Stewart v. U.S. I.N.S., 762 F.2d 193, 199 (2d Cir. 1985) (finding "no jurisdictional basis existed" to issue injunctive relief when the application "presents issues which are entirely different from those which were alleged in [Plaintiff's] original complaint"); Pac. Radiation Oncology, LLC v. Queen's Med. Ctr., 810 F.3d 631, 633 (9th Cir. 2015) ("When a plaintiff seeks injunctive relief based on claims not pled in the complaint, the court does not have the authority to issue an injunction."). Plaintiff's Complaint alleges that Defendants permit third parties to assault Plaintiff and steal his belongings at the homeless shelter where he resides. His application for injunctive relief concerns different thefts, and therefore is outside the jurisdiction of the Court. (Signed by Judge Lorna G. Schofield on 9/15/2022) (tg)
|
|
Filing 11
ORDER granting in part and denying in part #8 LETTER MOTION for Conference for Court to set briefing schedule for Defendant's motion to dismiss addressed to Judge Lorna G. Schofield from Thomas Lai dated September 14, 2022. Application GRANTED in part. Defendant's proposed briefing schedule is adopted. Defendant shall file its motion by October 19, 2022. Plaintiff may file a response, but is not required to do so. The parties'memoranda of law in connection with the motion each shall not exceed 25 pages. No reply shall be filed unless requested by the Court. Whether or not Plaintiff responds, the Court will impartially review Defendants motion. Defendants deadline to respond to the Complaint is stayed by the filing of this letter, per the Court's Individual Rules. In light of the motion, discovery is STAYED, and the conference scheduled for November 8, 2022, at 4:10 PM is CANCELLED. (Signed by Judge Lorna G. Schofield on 9/15/2022) (mml)
|
|
MAILING RECEIPT: Document No: 10. Mailed to: Ahmed Samiraly Edris G.P.O. Box 7737 New York, NY 10116. (kh)
|
|
Set/Reset Deadlines: Motions due by 10/19/2022. Responses due by 11/16/2022. (mml)
|
|
Filing 10
ORDER FOR INITIAL PRETRIAL CONFERENCE: Initial Conference by telephone set for 11/9/2022 at 4:10 PM before Judge Lorna G. Schofield. The parties shall call (888) 363-4749 and enter the access code 558-3333. The clerk is directed to mail a copy of this order to the pro se Plaintiff. (Signed by Judge Lorna G. Schofield on 9/14/2022) (vfr)
|
|
Filing 9
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE of Pre-motion conference letter, DE#8 served on Ahmed Samiraly Edris on September 14, 2022. Service was made by Mail. Document filed by City of New York..(Lai, Thomas)
|
|
Filing 8
LETTER MOTION for Conference for Court to set briefing schedule for Defendant's motion to dismiss addressed to Judge Lorna G. Schofield from Thomas Lai dated September 14, 2022. Document filed by City of New York..(Lai, Thomas)
|
|
Filing 7
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE of Notice of Appearance, DE#6 served on Ahmed Samiraly Edris on September 14, 2022. Service was made by Mail. Document filed by City of New York..(Lai, Thomas)
|
|
Filing 6
NOTICE OF APPEARANCE by Thomas Lai on behalf of City of New York..(Lai, Thomas)
|
|
Filing 5
LETTER from A. Edris, dated 9/2/22 re: "EMERGENCY HELP IS NEEDED NOW" - I would like to tell the judge to ask for back-up help from Federal Law Enforcement Agencies so that the criminals do not threaten the judge in any way and do not steal from the Federal Court like they did at the Supreme Court where they stole two papers from another docket and placed them in my file to scare the judge etc. Document filed by Ahmed Samiraly Edris.(sc)
|
|
MAILING RECEIPT: Document No: 4. Mailed to: Ahmed Samiraly Edris G.P.O. Box 7737 New York, NY 10116. (kh)
|
|
Filing 4
ORDER REFERRING CASE TO MAGISTRATE JUDGE Order that case be referred to the Clerk of Court for assignment to a Magistrate Judge for General Pretrial (includes scheduling, discovery, non-dispositive pretrial motions, and settlement). Referred to Magistrate Judge Gabriel W. Gorenstein. (Signed by Judge Lorna G. Schofield on 9/2/2022) (jca)
|
|
Filing 2
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE of Summons and Complaint. City of New York, served on 8/24/2022, answer due 9/14/2022; NYPD & DHS served on 8/24/2022, answer due 9/14/2022. Service was accepted by Jerry Bradshaw, Unit Chief. Document filed by Ahmed Samiraly Edris. (sc)
|
|
Filing 1
COMPLAINT against City of New York, NYPD & DHS. (Filing Fee $ 402.00, Receipt Number 4725)Document filed by Ahmed Samiraly Edris..(rdz) Modified on 8/22/2022 (rdz).
|
|
Case Designated ECF. (rdz) Modified on 8/22/2022 (rdz).
|
|
Magistrate Judge Gabriel W. Gorenstein is so designated. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Section 636(c) and Fed. R. Civ. P. 73(b)(1) parties are notified that they may consent to proceed before a United States Magistrate Judge. Parties who wish to consent may access the necessary form at the following link: #https://nysd.uscourts.gov/sites/default/files/2018-06/AO-3.pdf. (rdz)
|
|
SUMMONS ISSUED as to City of New York, NYPD & DHS..(rdz) Modified on 8/22/2022 (rdz).
|
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.
