Jason Goodman remains in hot water over judge’s ruling in SDNY lawsuit — gaslights CrowdSource The Truth dupes

EDITORIAL

 

cstteeeeeee

The federal judge in the lawsuit against Jason Goodman has issued a ruling requiring the pro se plaintiff to refile the operative complaint.

Judge has granted permission to re-file complaint.

Court grants Plaintiff leave to re-file, within twenty-one days of the date of this order”

 

SDNY

WHAT DID JASON GOODMAN SAY?

 

cstt

cswwwwewwweeeee

WHAT DID THE FEDERAL JUDGE REALLY SAY?

cs33333wweeeee

cstteewwweeeee

MEMORANDUM ORDER: Based on the foregoing reasons, Plaintiff’s motion to disqualify the undersigned is denied. Plaintiff’s amended complaint is hereby dismissed because (1) Plaintiff failed to state a claim under civil RICO, 18 U.S.C. § 1964, or under 42 U.S.C. § 1985; (2) Plaintiff failed to establish standing to enforce federal or state criminal statutes; and (3) the Court declines under 28 U.S.C. § 1367(c) to exercise jurisdiction over supplemental state law claims. The Court grants Plaintiff’s motion to dismiss Defendant’s counterclaims for failure to state a claim. The Court denies Plaintiff’s motions to file his proposed second amended complaint on the basis of futility. The Court further denies as moot all remaining open motions. The Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to terminate all pending motions in this matter. Because Plaintiff may be able to plead a civil copyright claim or invoke the Court’s diversity jurisdiction by proceeding only against parties as to whom there is diversity of citizenship, the Court grants Plaintiff leave to re-file, within twenty-one days of the date of this order, a second amended complaint that complies with the requirements set forth herein. The Court cautions Plaintiff that his second amended complaint can be dismissed as frivolous and he may be subject to sanction if he re-files a complaint in substantially the same form as the amended complaint or the proposed second amended complaint. If no second amended complaint is filed by September 10, 2019, this case will be immediately dismissed. 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, 44445 (1962) (holding that an appellant demonstrates good faith when he seeks review of a nonfrivolous issue). The Clerk of Court is directed to mail copies of this order to Plaintiff and Defendant, noting service on the docket. SO ORDERED. (Amended Pleadings due by 9/10/2019.) (Signed by Judge Valerie E. Caproni on 8/20/2019) (jca) Transmission to Docket Assistant Clerk for processing. (Entered: 08/20/2019)

maxresdqqqqefault

 

 

To be continued…….

 

 

 

Advertisements

One Comment Add yours

Leave a Reply