Pesic v. Mauritius International Arbitration Centre
- Jesse Furman
- 1:23-cv-01100
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 7
In Pesic v. Mauritius International Arbitration Centre, Judge Furman denied misconduct findings but granted voluntary dismissal of claims against Robert Jay Sawatsky.
Peter Nikola Pesic’s request for misconduct findings was denied, while his motion to voluntarily dismiss all claims against Robert Jay Sawatsky was granted. Sawatsky was terminated as a defendant; the remaining defendants and the case’s service schedule were affected by the related conference adjournment and service deadline.
What happened
In Peter Nikola Pesic v. Mauritius International Arbitration Centre, Peter Nikola Pesic, representing himself, asked the court to find that Defendant Robert Jay Sawatsky engaged in litigation misconduct and to dismiss all claims against Sawatsky based on statements Sawatsky made in the case.
The court denied Pesic’s motion for judicial findings of misconduct. The provided text does not state that the court made any finding that Sawatsky committed misconduct.
Judge Jesse Furman treated the remainder of Pesic’s request as a motion to voluntarily dismiss all claims against Sawatsky under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(2) and granted it. The clerk was directed to terminate Sawatsky as a defendant; the January 13, 2026 initial pretrial conference was adjourned indefinitely, and Pesic was reminded that he had until March 9, 2026, to serve the remaining defendants.
The detailed version
- Pesic v. Mauritius International Arbitration Centre · No. 1:23-cv-01100
- Jesse Furman
- Dec. 2, 2025
Background
Peter Nikola Pesic, appearing without a lawyer, filed a combined motion concerning Defendant Robert Jay Sawatsky. The motion asked the court to make judicial findings that Sawatsky engaged in litigation misconduct and to dismiss all claims against Sawatsky based on statements attributed to him in declarations and other filings.
The motion alleged that Sawatsky made threatening and coercive communications, retaliated after service of process, and admitted that he was not an owner, beneficial owner, officer, principal, control person, or contracting party of Timeline Holdings Inc. The court’s order, however, did not adopt those allegations or make findings about them.
Rulings
The motion requesting a judicial finding of misconduct against Sawatsky was denied.
The court treated the remainder of Pesic’s request as a motion to voluntarily dismiss all claims against Sawatsky under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(2), which allows a court to approve a voluntary dismissal when court approval is required. That motion was granted. The order does not state that the dismissal was with or without prejudice.
Effect of the Order
The clerk was directed to terminate Robert Jay Sawatsky as a defendant and to terminate ECF No. 112. The initial pretrial conference scheduled for January 13, 2026, was adjourned indefinitely. The court reminded Pesic that he had until March 9, 2026, to serve the remaining defendants, citing ECF No. 96. The order states that no paper copy needed to be sent because both parties had consented to electronic notice through the court’s filing system.
Read the full 7-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.