ORDER OF DISMISSAL UNDER 28 U.S.C. § 1651

JOHN G. KOELTL, District Judge.

On January 29, 2016, the plaintiff was barred from filing any new civil action in this Court regarding his 2007 state-court foreclosure action without first obtaining permission from the Court to file. See Bartlett v. Tribeca Lending Corp., No. 15-CV-6102, ECF No. 11 (S.D.N.Y. Jan. 29, 2016). The plaintiff files this new pro se action, which arises from his 2007 state-court foreclosure action, but he failed to comply with the January 29, 2016 bar order's requirement that he file a motion captioned "Application Pursuant to Court Order Seeking Permission to File," along with the proposed complaint. Rather, the plaintiff filed a complaint that appears to include introductory remarks addressed to Chief Judge McMahon in which the plaintiff summarizes the complaint and asserts that he has good cause to file the complaint. ECF No. 1, at 9-15. To the extent the plaintiff's introductory remarks can be construed as a motion seeking permission to file, the request must be denied because this action is not a departure from the plaintiff's pattern of vexatious and frivolous filings. The Court therefore dismisses the action as frivolous. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i).

The Clerk of Court is directed to mail a copy of this order to the plaintiff, and to note service on the docket. The Court certifies, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3), that any appeal from this order would not be taken in good faith and therefore in forma pauperis status is denied for the purpose of an appeal. See Coppedge v. United States, 369 U.S. 438, 444-45 (1962).

SO ORDERED.