Akram et al v. Mughal et al

Filing 88

ORDER denying 82 Motion for Leave to Appeal: The Court finds no grounds to render its September 8, 2022 Discovery Order directly appealable to the Second Circuit. To the extent that this Order denying Plaintiff's motion (which was addressed t o this Court) should be issued as a Report and Recommendation, the Court hereby recommends that the assigned District Judge decline to certify the Discovery Order as immediately appealable to the Second Circuit on any ground whatsoever. SEE attached Order for further details. So Ordered by Magistrate Judge Anne Y. Shields on 11/16/2022. (DM)

Case 2:17-cv-02758-AMD-AYS Document 88 Filed 11/16/22 Page 1 of 2 PageID #: 1135

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

x

WASEEM AKRAM and NADEEM AKRAM,
-against-

ORDER
CV 17-2758 (AMD)(AYS)

Plaintiffs,

KHURSHID MUGHAL,
Defendant.
SHIELDS, United States Magistrate Judge:

x

In an order dated September 8, 2022, this Court rendered a decision on a discovery
motion (the “Discovery Order”). The Discovery Order denied Defendant’s request for the
ultimate sanction of dismissal, but otherwise granted sanctions against Plaintiffs, Waseem
Akram and Nadeem Akram. On September 22, 2022, Defendant moved for reconsideration of
the Discovery Order. Thereafter, on October 11, 2022, this Court adhered to its decision as to the
Discovery Order. (Docket Entry (“DE”) [80].)
On October, 6, 2022, prior to this Court’s decision adhering to the Discovery Order,
Defendant noticed an appeal to the Second Circuit. (DE [79].) On October 18, 2022, the Second
Circuit issued an order directing Defendant (Appellant therein) to file a response with that Court,
by November 1, 2022, either setting forth the basis for that Court’s jurisdiction or withdrawing
its appeal. (DE [81].)
On October 26, 2022, Defendant filed a letter motion with this Court seeking an order for
this Court to “certify or amend” the Discovery Order and denial of reconsideration thereof to
allow Plaintiff to appeal the Discovery Order directly to the Second Circuit. (DE [82].) On
October 14, 2022, the Second Circuit ordered that the appeal before it be held in abeyance
pending a decision on Defendant/Appellant’s motion for leave to appeal. (DE [84].)

Case 2:17-cv-02758-AMD-AYS Document 88 Filed 11/16/22 Page 2 of 2 PageID #: 1136

As alluded to by the Second Circuit, the Discovery Order (to which Defendant never
even objected to the assigned District Judge) is not directly appealable to the Second Circuit. The
Court finds no grounds to render it so. Accordingly, upon consideration of Plaintiff’s motion, the
Court declines to order the relief sought. To be clear, the Court does not consider the Discovery
Order to have “resolve[d] important questions completely separate from the merits.” Digital
Equip. Corp. v. Desktop Direct, Inc., 511 U.S. 863, 867 (1994). Nor does the Discovery Order
“render such important questions effectively unreviewable” if an appeal is delayed until after a
final trial. Id. To the extent that this Order denying Plaintiff’s motion (which was addressed to
this Court) should be issued as a Report and Recommendation, the Court hereby recommends
that the assigned District Judge decline to certify the Discovery Order as immediately appealable
to the Second Circuit on any ground whatsoever.

SO ORDERED.
Dated: November 16, 2022
Central Islip, New York

/s/ Anne Y. Shields
ANNE Y. SHIELDS
United States Magistrate Judge