NEWARK, N.J. — A federal judge dismissed a lawsuit filed against the U.S. Postal Service and Postal Inspection Service in which a New Jersey man claimed missing mail caused severe financial and personal harm.
U.S. District Judge Julien X. Neals threw out the complaint filed by Mahmoud Elmilligy after granting his request to proceed without paying court fees, ruling the case did not meet legal standards required to move forward.
Claims tied to years of missing and rerouted mail
Elmilligy alleged that between 2022 and 2025, critical mail—including IRS checks, legal notices, and employment-related documents—was stolen, rerouted, or interfered with, particularly through a post office in Budd Lake.
He said he repeatedly contacted postal staff and supervisors through phone, email, and in-person visits but received no meaningful response or investigation.
According to the complaint, the missing mail included time-sensitive communications related to unemployment benefits and Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) matters involving his employer.
Plaintiff links mail issues to major life consequences
Elmilligy argued the alleged mail disruptions led to severe consequences, including loss of housing, inability to secure employment, and deterioration of his physical and mental health.
He sought $1 million in damages, claiming violations of his constitutional rights under the First, Fifth, and Fourteenth Amendments.
The lawsuit was filed under a legal framework known as a Bivens action, which allows individuals to sue federal officials for alleged constitutional violations.
—
Key Points
• Federal judge dismissed lawsuit alleging USPS mail issues caused financial collapse
• Plaintiff claimed missing IRS checks and legal mail led to housing and job loss
• Court ruled complaint failed to meet legal standards to proceed
—
Court screening finds complaint insufficient
Because Elmilligy filed the case without paying filing fees, the court conducted a preliminary screening required under federal law.
Judges must dismiss complaints that fail to state a plausible legal claim or rely on unsupported allegations.
The court found Elmilligy’s claims did not meet that threshold, resulting in dismissal of the case at an early stage.
Pattern of similar filings noted
The court also noted that Elmilligy had filed 27 federal cases within a short period in 2025, many of which involved similar allegations.
This pattern factored into the court’s review as it assessed the viability of the claims presented.
Current status
The complaint has been dismissed, and no further proceedings have been scheduled. It is unclear whether Elmilligy will attempt to amend or refile the case.
