Yil Jo v. Dept. of Justice
| Young Yil Jo |
| Dept. of Justice |
| 1:2022cv07699 |
| September 7, 2022 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of New York |
| Laura Taylor Swain |
| Civil Rights: Other |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1331 Fed. Question |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on September 15, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| MAILING RECEIPT: Document No: 2-3. Mailed to: Young YilJo 01183-112 2629 W. 8th St #301 Los Angeles, CA 90057. (kh) |
Filing 3
CIVIL JUDGMENT: For the reasons stated in the September 13, 2022, order, this action is dismissed. 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. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Laura Taylor Swain on 9/13/2022) (Attachments: #1 Pro Se Appeal Package) (sac)
|
|
Filing 2
ORDER OF DISMISSAL UNDER 28 U.S.C. 1651: On May 6, 2015, Plaintiff was barred from filing any new action in forma pauperis (IFP) without first obtaining from the court leave to file. See In re Young Yil Jo, ECF 1:14-CV-7793, 3 (S.D.N.Y. May 6, 2015). On September 7, 2022, Plaintiff filed this new pro se case. Because Plaintiff did not pay the $402.00 in fees required to file this action, the Court assumes Plaintiff is seeking to proceed IFP. Plaintiff has not sought leave from the court. The Court therefore dismisses the action without prejudice for Plaintiff's failure to comply with the May 6, 2015, order. The Court advises Plaintiff that the filing injunctions issued in In re Young Yil Jo, 1:14-CV-7793 (S.D.N.Y.), remain in effect. Plaintiff is enjoined from filing any new civil action or proceeding in this court without first obtaining leave of the court. Plaintiff also remains barred from filing any document in this court in the name of another person. 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. 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). The Clerk of Court is directed to enter judgment in this case. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Laura Taylor Swain on 9/13/2022) (sac) Transmission to Office of the Clerk of Court for processing.
|
| NOTICE OF CASE REASSIGNMENT - SUA SPONTE to Judge Laura Taylor Swain. Judge Unassigned is no longer assigned to the case..(aea) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT against Dept. of Justice. Document filed by Young Yil Jo..(rdz) |
| Case Designated ECF. (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
| Search for this case: Yil Jo 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 ] |
| Petitioner: Young Yil Jo | |
| 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 ] |
| Respondent: 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.
