KOMATSU v. NTT DATA INC AG USA LLC (2018)

SUMMARY ORDER

Plaintiff-Appellant Towaki Komatsu (“Komatsu”), pro se, appeals from the district court’s dismissal of his claims against Defendants-Appellees NTT Data, Inc. and Credit Suisse AG, a/k/a Credit Suisse Securities (USA) LLC. See Komatsu v. NTT Data, Inc., No. 15-CIV-7007, 2016 WL 2889064 (S.D.N.Y. May 17, 2016). We assume the parties’ familiarity with the underlying facts, the procedural history of the case, and the issues on appeal.

Under the Rooker–Feldman doctrine, “federal district courts lack jurisdiction over suits that are, in substance, appeals from state-court judgments.” Hoblock v. Albany Cty. Bd. of Elections, 422 F.3d 77, 84 (2d Cir. 2005). “Rooker–Feldman directs federal courts to abstain from considering claims when four requirements are met: (1) the plaintiff lost in state court, (2) the plaintiff complains of injuries caused by the state court judgment, (3) the plaintiff invites district court review of that judgment, and (4) the state court judgment was entered before the plaintiff’s federal suit commenced.” McKithen v. Brown, 626 F.3d 143, 154 (2d Cir. 2010). We review de novo a district court’s application of the Rooker–Feldman doctrine. Hoblock, 422 F.3d at 83. Having conducted an independent and de novo review of the record in light of these principles, we conclude that the Rooker–Feldman doctrine applies here: Komatsu lost in New York state court before he filed this federal lawsuit; he complains of an injury caused by the state court’s erroneous interpretation of state law, explaining that the state court’s decision “induced and misled” him; and he seeks review and reversal of that judgment. Amended Compl. at 4–5, 7, Komatsu v. NTT Data, Inc., No. 15-CIV-7007 (S.D.N.Y. Sept. 10, 2015), ECF No. 3; see also McKithen, 626 F.3d at 155 (observing that “[t]he proper vehicle for [plaintiff] to challenge the state court’s interpretation of [state law] was an appeal to the New York Appellate Division” in concluding that Rooker–Feldman applies to bar federal court jurisdiction). The Rooker–Feldman doctrine thus deprives this Court and the district court of jurisdiction to review Komatsu’s claims.

We have considered each of Komatsu’s arguments to the contrary and find them to be without merit. Accordingly, the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED. It is hereby ORDERED that Komatsu’s May 11, 2018 and May 18, 2018 motions to seal are GRANTED to the extent necessary to preserve confidentiality. The Clerk of Court is directed to seal the motions consistent with this order.