STANLEY ERNEST v. OCFS SCR NYPD (2026)

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

On July 10, 2026, Magistrate Judge Joseph Marutollo issued a report and recommendation in which he recommended that the Court grant the pro se plaintiff's request to proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP”) but dismiss this action for lack of subject matter jurisdiction and failure to prosecute. (ECF No. 7.) For the reasons that follow, the Court adopts the report and recommendation in its entirety.

On March 16, 2026, the plaintiff filed a complaint in the Southern District of New York against the New York State Office of Children and Family Services (“OCFS”), the New York Statewide Central Register of Child Abuse and Maltreatment (“SCR”), and the New York City Police Department (“NYPD”) for “emotional distress, employment opportunities being interrupted, and defamation of character.” (ECF No. 1.) He also moved to proceed IFP. (ECF No. 2.) On April 6, 2026, Judge Laura Taylor Swain sua sponte transferred the case to this district. (ECF No. 4.) On April 15, 2026, Judge Marutollo issued an order to show cause in which he noted that while “Plaintiff states that the basis for federal-court jurisdiction is diversity of citizenship ․ Plaintiff and Defendants are citizens of New York.” (ECF Order to Show Cause dated Apr. 15, 2026.) He directed the plaintiff to “file a letter informing the Court whether he intends on voluntarily dismissing this action without prejudice.” (Id.)

When the plaintiff did not respond to the order to show cause, Judge Marutollo issued an order on April 28, 2026 extending the plaintiff's deadline until May 8, 2026 and warning him that failure to respond “may result in a sua sponte report and recommendation that this action be dismissed.” (ECF Order dated Apr. 28, 2026.) The plaintiff did not respond. Judge Marutollo gave the plaintiff two additional extensions, in which he warned the plaintiff that the case might be dismissed if he did not respond. (See ECF Order dated May 14, 2026; ECF Order dated June 9, 2026.) Once again, the plaintiff did not respond or otherwise communicate with the Court. Judge Marutollo issued a sua sponte report and recommendation, in which he recommended that the Court grant the plaintiff's request to proceed IFP but dismiss the case for lack of subject matter jurisdiction and failure to prosecute. (ECF No. 7.) No party has filed an objection to the report and recommendation and the time for doing so has passed.

A district court reviewing a report and recommendation “may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or recommendations made by the magistrate judge.” 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C). To accept a report and recommendation to which no timely objection has been made, “a district court need only satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of the record.” VOX Amplification Ltd. v. Meussdorffer, 50 F. Supp. 3d 355, 369 (E.D.N.Y. 2014).

The Court has carefully reviewed Judge Marutollo's thorough and well-reasoned report and recommendation for clear error and finds none. Accordingly, the Court adopts the report and recommendation in its entirety, grants the plaintiff's motion to proceed IFP, and orders that the complaint be dismissed without prejudice pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 12(h)(3) and 41(b). See Gaston v. Shelter, No. 24-CV-4386, 2024 WL 3360365, at *2 (E.D.N.Y. July 10, 2024) (“Because plaintiff has not alleged a valid basis for the Court's federal question or diversity jurisdiction, the Court must dismiss plaintiff's complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction”); Varney v. Batman, No. 08-CV-9702, 2012 WL 1080137, at *1 (S.D.N.Y. Mar. 30, 2012) (dismissing case for failure to prosecute without prejudice where a pro se plaintiff failed to respond to an order to show cause for three months). The Court certifies pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal would not be taken in good faith and therefore IFP status is denied for purposes of an appeal. See Coppedge v. United States, 369 U.S. 438, 444–45 (1962). The Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to mail a copy of this order to the plaintiff and to note the mailing on the docket.

SO ORDERED.

ANN M. DONNELLY United States District Judge