BROOKLYN, NY – A federal judge has ordered a plaintiff to explain why his lawsuit against FEMA and others should not be dismissed after repeated failures to meet filing and service deadlines.
According to a memorandum and order filed October 10 in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York, plaintiff Awais G. Gull sued the United States, the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), and two individuals — Joseph Benjamin Hodge and Stephanie Leverich — over a June 2024 motor vehicle collision.
The suit alleges that Leverich, operating a vehicle owned or used by FEMA, struck cars driven by Gull and Hodge.
Gull’s administrative claim was denied by the Department of Homeland Security on September 17, 2024, giving him until March 17, 2025, to file a federal action under the six-month limitation set by 28 U.S.C. § 2401(b).
However, the complaint was not filed until July 1, 2025 — more than three months after the statutory deadline had expired.
Court cites procedural delays and lack of response
Court records show that Gull’s proposed summons was initially rejected for procedural errors, including incorrect information and missing defendant details. A corrected version was issued July 15.
Magistrate Judge Kaminsky later scheduled an initial conference for September 30, but adjourned it after noting the plaintiff had not filed proof of service by September 25.
In that order, the judge warned that continued failure to file proof of service would result in dismissal without prejudice.
By October 2, no proof of service had been filed, prompting U.S. District Judge Kiyo A. Matsumoto to issue an order to show cause.
Plaintiff faces possible dismissal
The court is now requiring Gull to explain why his complaint should not be dismissed for lack of timely service and failure to comply with court orders.
No response from the plaintiff had been entered as of the filing of the memorandum and order.
A federal case over a car crash involving FEMA may soon end not on its merits, but over missed deadlines.