ORDER By order dated April 17, 2019, the Court granted Plaintiff leave to file an amended complaint. (ECF No. 7.) In the original complaint, Plaintiff had raised 17 claims, most of them unrelated to each other and against immune defendants and private parties. On June 17, 2019, Plaintiff filed his amended complaint, naming suable defendants, but the amended complaint still raised mostly unrelated claims. For the reasons set forth below, the Court dismisses some of Plaintiff’s claims under Heck v. Humphrey, orders him to show cause why other claims should not be dismissed as untimely, and dismisses most of the remaining claims without prejudice to Plaintiff’s reasserting those claims in new civil actions. STANDARD OF REVIEW The Court must dismiss a complaint, or portion thereof, that is frivolous or malicious, fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, or seeks monetary relief from a defendant who is immune from such relief. 28 U.S.C. §§1915(e)(2)(B), 1915A(b); see Abbas v. Dixon, 480 F.3d 636, 639 (2d Cir. 2007). The Court must also dismiss a complaint when the Court lacks subject matter jurisdiction. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(h)(3).While the law mandates dismissal on any of these grounds, the Court is obliged to construe pro se pleadings liberally, Harris v. Mills, 572 F.3d 66, 72 (2d Cir. 2009), and interpret them to raise the “strongest [claims] that they suggest,” Triestman v. Fed. Bureau of Prisons, 470 F.3d 471, 474 (2d Cir. 2006) (internal quotation marks and citations omitted) (emphasis in original). BACKGROUND In the amended complaint, Plaintiff brings the following claims: (1) Plaintiff’s two sentences from the 1980s were illegal. (Am. Compl.
1, 2.) (2) After Plaintiff’s release from state custody in 2005, and up until the present, the New York State Department of Corrections and Community Supervision (DOCCS) has denied him mental health services (“inadequate mental health treatment claims”). (Id. 3.) (3) In 2015 and 2016, Defendant Parole Officer Patricia Middleton sexually harassed Plaintiff by observing him while he submitted to urine tests (“sexual harassment claims”). (Id. 4.) (4) In 2005, the New York City Housing Authority (NYCHA) denied Plaintiff a Section 8 apartment for approximately six months based on his mental illness and his felony conviction (“housing discrimination claims”). (Id. 5.) (5) On April 6, 2016, unnamed police officers falsely arrested Plaintiff based on Defendant Erica Stephens’ false claims of assault by Plaintiff. On July 22, 2016, all charges were dismissed (“April 6, 2016 claims”). (Id.
