Shukla v. Apple Inc. et al

Filing 93

ORDER. Shukla's memorandum is stricken, and the Court will disregard it. (To be clear, the Clerk's Office need not strike the memorandum from the docket as it should remain part of the record in the case. But the Court will not consider the memorandum.) Additionally, it has come to the Court's attention that Shukla filed the memorandum and another document pertaining to this case on the docket for Case No. 19-CV-10578, Shukla v. Deloitte Consulting LLP. See 19-CV-1078, ECF Nos. 339, 340. It is not clear to the Court whether these filings were by accident, or an attempt by Shukla to circumvent the Court's revocation of his electronic filing privileges in this case, see ECF No. 91 at 6-7. In any event, and to be clear, Shukla may not file documents relating to this case on the 19-CV-10578 docket. The Court will not consider documents in this case filed on any docket other than this docket, and continuing to file documents pertaining to this case on other dockets may result in sanctions. The Clerk of Court is directed to mail a copy of this Order to Shukla. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 11/18/21) (yv) Transmission to Docket Assistant Clerk for processing.

Case 1:21-cv-03287-JMF-SDA Document 93 Filed 11/18/21 Page 1 of 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
---------------------------------------------------------------------- X
:
ASHU SHUKLA,
:
:
Plaintiff,
:
:
-v:
:
APPLE INC., et al.,
:
:
Defendants.
:
:
---------------------------------------------------------------------- X

21-CV-3287 (JMF)
ORDER

JESSE M. FURMAN, United States District Judge:
On November 12, 2021, Plaintiff Ashu Shukla filed a memorandum of law in support of
his motion for recusal of the undersigned. See ECF No. 92. The Court, however, had already
denied Shukla’s motion. See ECF No. 91. Moreover, Shukla’s memorandum was filed late, well
after his November 4, 2021 deadline, ECF No. 78, and Shukla neither sought nor received an
extension. Accordingly, Shukla’s memorandum is stricken, and the Court will disregard it. (To
be clear, the Clerk’s Office need not strike the memorandum from the docket as it should remain
part of the record in the case. But the Court will not consider the memorandum.)
Additionally, it has come to the Court’s attention that Shukla filed the memorandum and
another document pertaining to this case on the docket for Case No. 19-CV-10578, Shukla v.
Deloitte Consulting LLP. See 19-CV-1078, ECF Nos. 339, 340. It is not clear to the Court
whether these filings were by accident, or an attempt by Shukla to circumvent the Court’s
revocation of his electronic filing privileges in this case, see ECF No. 91 at 6-7. In any event,
and to be clear, Shukla may not file documents relating to this case on the 19-CV-10578 docket.
The Court will not consider documents in this case filed on any docket other than this docket,
and continuing to file documents pertaining to this case on other dockets may result in sanctions.
The Clerk of Court is directed to mail a copy of this Order to Shukla.
SO ORDERED.
Dated: November 18, 2021
New York, New York

__________________________________
JESSE M. FURMAN
United States District Judge