
    Anthony PERRI, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. CITY OF NEW YORK, Illegal Units of the N.Y.P.D., and the so named individuals of their Unit, John Doe # 1, John Doe # 2, Anthony R. Disalvio, Jane Doe, Defendants-Appellees.
    
    No. 09-5009-CV.
    United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit.
    June 24, 2010.
    Anthony S. Perri, New York, NY, pro se.
    Scott Schorr, Senior Counsel, Appeals Division, The City of New York Law Department, New York, NY, for Defendants-Appellees.
    PRESENT: RALPH K. WINTER, JOSÉ A. CABRANES, RICHARD C. WESLEY, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The Clerk of Court is directed to amend the official caption to conform to the listing of the parties staled above.
    
   SUMMARY ORDER

Plaintiff-appellant Anthony Perri (“Per-ri” or “Plaintiff’), pro se, appeals from the District Court’s order declining to appoint a guardian ad litem and dismissing his complaint without prejudice. We assume the parties’ familiarity with the factual and procedural history of the case.

We review decisions on whether to appoint a guardian ad litem under Fed. R.Civ.P. 17(c) for abuse of discretion. See Ferrelli v. River Manor Health Care Ctr., 323 F.3d 196, 200 (2d Cir.2003). If, in the district court’s view, it is clear that no substantial claim could be asserted on behalf of a plaintiff, even with the assistance of a guardian ad litem, the court may dismiss the complaint without prejudice. See Berrios v. N.Y. City Hous. Auth., 564 F.3d 130, 135 (2d Cir.2009).

Having reviewed the record in light of those principles, we affirm the judgment of the District Court substantially for the reasons stated by Judge Ross in her thorough and well-reasoned Opinion and Order. See Perri v. City of N.Y., No. 08 CV 0451, 2009 WL 3839317 (E.D.N.Y. Nov. 17, 2009).

CONCLUSION

We have considered all of plaintiff’s arguments and find them to be without merit. For the foregoing reasons, the judgment of the District Court is AFFIRMED.  