Edwards v. Gutwien ( 2022 )

Tota by We UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT i Se EON TCAD EY FILED | SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK nee oe MARK EDWARDS, pee PEE Ufiifooza □ | Plaintiff, -against- 21 CIVIL 3183 (PMH) JUDGMENT GREEN HAVEN C.F. HEARING OFFICER ERIC GUTWEIN, et al., Defendants. ween nnn eee eee eee eee XK It is hereby ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED: That for the reasons stated in the Court's Opinion and Order dated April 7, 2022, Defendants’ motion to dismiss Is GRANTED. While "[d]istrict courts should frequently provide leave to amend before dismissing a pro se complaint...leave to amend is not necessary when it would be futile." Reed v. Friedman Mem. Corp., 541 F. App'x 40, 41 (2d Cir. 2013) (citing Cuoco v. Moritsugu, 222 F.3d 99, 112 (2d Cir. 2000)). In this case, the Complaint is dismissed with prejudice because any amendment would be futile; accordingly, the case is closed. Dated: New York, New York April 11, 2022 RUBY J. KRAJICK Clerk of Court BY: ny A Deputy Clerk