Shukla v. Deloitte Consulting LLP
- Alison Nathan
- 1:19-cv-10578
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Shukla v. Deloitte Consulting LLP, Magistrate Judge Aaron denied Shukla’s successive request to reopen an earlier order and warned of possible dismissal.
Ashu Shukla, whose successive request to reopen an earlier order was denied and who was warned that noncompliance with an earlier order could lead to a recommendation of dismissal for failure to prosecute.
What happened
In Shukla v. Deloitte Consulting LLP, the court denied Ashu Shukla’s March 24, 2021 request to reopen an earlier order that had denied his first request to reopen.
The court said the first request was properly treated as a request for reconsideration, and that the rules do not allow repeated requests for reconsideration or reopening. It reminded the parties that they must comply with an earlier order by April 5, 2021.
Magistrate Judge Stewart D. Aaron warned that if Shukla did not timely comply, he might recommend to District Judge Alison Nathan that the case be dismissed for failure to prosecute. The court did not dismiss the case in this order.
The detailed version
- Shukla v. Deloitte Consulting LLP · No. 1:19-cv-10578
- Alison Nathan
- Mar. 30, 2021
Background
Ashu Shukla filed a March 24, 2021 letter motion asking the court to reopen its March 23, 2021 order. That earlier order had decided Shukla’s March 22, 2021 letter motion to reopen.
Ruling on the Motion
The court denied the March 24 motion. It explained that the Local Civil Rules allow a party to seek reconsideration or reargument of an order deciding a motion. The court had properly treated Shukla’s first letter motion to reopen as a motion for reconsideration and had denied it under the standards governing reconsideration. The court stated that the applicable rules do not provide for multiple motions for reconsideration or motions to “reopen,” and that filing a successive motion wastes court resources.
Compliance Deadline and Warning
The court reminded Shukla that the deadline for the parties to comply with the provisions of an earlier order was April 5, 2021. That earlier order stated that violating it could lead to sanctions, including dismissal. The court said Shukla’s March 29 letter appeared to suggest that he might not comply. Magistrate Judge Stewart D. Aaron cautioned that, if Shukla failed to comply on time, he might recommend that District Judge Alison Nathan dismiss the case for failure to prosecute. This order itself did not dismiss the case.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.