Ciccaglione v. New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene ( 2022 )

Case 1:21-cv-0/696-JGK Documentio riled Gcil4ice Page 1 Oo JESS, Ei RES ey We as GEORGIA M, PESTANA THE CITY OF New YoRK AIMEE K. LULICH Corperation Counsel Senior Counsel L AW DEP ARTMENT alulich@law.nye.gov 100 CHURCH STREET NEW YORK, NY 10007 February 14, 2022 BY ECF Honorable John G, Koelt! United States District Court Southern District of New York 500 Pearl Street New York, New York 10007 Re: Bryce Ciccaglione v. New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene, et. al., 21-CV-7696 (JGK) Your Honor: I am an attorney in the office of Georgia M. Pestana, Corporation Counsel of the City of New York, attorney for defendants New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene (“DOHMH”) and Mayor Eric Adams in the above-entitled action. Defendants write regarding their anticipated motion to dismiss in light of plaintiff's Amended Complaint, which was filed on February 2, 2022, On or about January 14, 2022, defendants filed a pre-motion conference request regarding their anticipated motion to dismiss the Complaint. Plaintiff filed a response on January 17, 2022. The Court scheduled a pre-motion conference for February |, 2022, at which plaintiff stated that he did not intend to amend the Complaint. Instead, the Court set a briefing schedule for the motion to dismiss. The next day, notwithstanding his statement to the contrary at the conference, plaintiff filed an Amended Complaint (“AC”). For the reasons set forth in defendants’ first pre-motion conference letter, and the reasons set forth below, defendants intend to move to dismiss the AC. Accordingly, defendants respectfully request a pre-motion conference to that end, or, in the alternative, that the Court endorse a new briefing schedule for a motion to dismiss the AC permitting defendants an additional two weeks to file motion papers in light of the additional claims. The Amended Complaint contains all of the claims and allegation set forth in the Complaint, specifically, claims challenging the Key to NYC Executive Orders under the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”) and the U.S. Civil Rights Act (“CRA”). AC at §§ ILA & JILB. Additionally, the AC appears to add claims challenging the Key to NYC under the Fourth Amendment and the Nuremberg Code. Id. Further, the AC adds challenges to the Case 1:21-cv-07696-JGK Document15 Filed 02/14/24 Page