Rivera v. All the John Does that work at the 3:00pm to 11pm Brooklyn South Narcotic Unit 3-20-09 et al, No. 1:2011cv05586 - Document 7 (E.D.N.Y. 2011)

Court Description: MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER, Pltff has not responded to the Court's Order and the time for doing so has passed. Accordingly, the complaint is hereby dismissed without prejudice. The Court certifies pursuant to 28 USC sec. 1915(a)(3) that any appeal would not be taken in good faith and therefore in forma pauperis status is denied for purpose of an appeal. (Ordered by Judge Brian M. Cogan on 12/20/2011) c/m by chambers. Fwd. for Judgment. (Galeano, Sonia)

Download PDF
FILED I ,L \\\ "'00"'-'"''RC'b 8 IN CLERK'S OFFICE :Ol;~r2c~U;~;,D~' UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK ---------------------------------------------------------------)( SANTOS RIVERA, Plaintiff, -againstALL THE JOHN DOES THAT WORK AT BROOKLYN SOUTH NARCOTIC UNIT AND 72ND PRECINCT, 3:00PM TO 11PM, 3-20-09, MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER 11-CV -5586 (BMC) Defendants. ---------------------------------------------------------------)( Prose plaintiff Santos Rivera filed the above-captioned civil rights complaint in the Southern District ofNew York on October 31, 2011. The complaint was transferred to this Court on November 16, 2011. By Order entered November 21, 2011, this Court dismissed the complaint for failure to state a claim and granted plaintiff leave to file an amended complaint within 21 days. The Order stated that if plaintiff failed to amend within 21 days, ""the Court shall dismiss this complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A." Plaintiff has not responded to the Court's Order and the time for doing so has passed. Accordingly, the complaint is hereby dismissed without prejudice. The Court certifies pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal would not be taken in good faith and therefore in forma pauperis status is denied for purpose of an appeal. See Coppedge v. United States, 369 U.S. 438,444-45, S?_s_.c~,~----- SO ORDERED. Dated: Brooklyn, New York December 20, 2011 _ ¢

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.