Shukla v. Meta Platforms Inc.

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK Ashu SHUKLA, Plaintiff, -against- 23-CV-10150 (JGLC) DELOITTE CONSULTING LLP & META ORDER PLATFORMS INC., Defendants.

JESSICA G. L. CLARKE, United States District Judge: On October 22, 2024, Plaintiff filed a motion seeking to add Apple, Inc. as a defendant and to continue prosecuting this case against Deloitte Consulting, LLP. ECF No. 105. Once again, the Court reminds the Plaintiff that this case has already been dismissed and Plaintiff’s motion for reconsideration has been denied. ECF Nos. 91, 95. The Court DENIES the motion at ECF No. 105. This is not the first time Plaintiff has filed a motion in an attempt to continue litigating this terminated case. After the Court denied Plaintiff’s first motion for reconsideration, Plaintiff subsequently filed a “motion for relief from filing an appeal/stay on appeal.” See ECF No. 98. The Court interpreted this motion as motion for extension of time to file an appeal and granted a final extension. ECF No. 100. Plaintiff then filed several letters to the Court asserting an error in judgment in the order at ECF No. 100. In these letters, Plaintiff appeared to characterize the ECF No. 98 motion as another motion for reconsideration. See ECF No. 101, 103. To the extent that the Plaintiff is moving for reconsideration a second or third time, those motions are DENIED. The Plaintiff is directed to cease filing such motions, which seek to relitigate issues that this Court has already decided. The Plaintiff is notified that the Court “may impose filing restrictions if confronted with extraordinary circumstances including a demonstrated history by the party of vexatious or frivolous filings.” Sweigert v. Goodman, No. 18-CV-8653 (VEC), 2022 WL 168080, at *11 (S.D.N.Y. Jan. 19, 2022) (internal citations omitted). These restrictions include the institution of a “leave of court” requirement with respect to future filings. /d. If Plaintiff files another motion seeking to relitigate the issues that have already been decided, then he will be directed to show cause why the Court should not enter an order requiring Plaintiff to seek leave of the Court before making any filings in this case that have not previously been ordered. The Clerk of Court is directed to terminate ECF No. 105.

Dated: October 28, 2024 New York, New York SO ORDERED. pou KX \eanca | KAA Re

JESSICA G. L. CLARKE United States District Judge