CHOWDHURY v. VEON LTD. et al
New York Southern District Court | |
Judge: | John P Cronan |
Referred: | Robert W Lehrburger |
Case #: | 1:21-cv-03527 |
Nature of Suit | 190 Contract - Other Contract |
Cause | 28:1332nr Diversity: Notice of Removal |
Case Filed: | Apr 21, 2021 |
Terminated: | May 18, 2023 |
Case in other court: | Supreme Court of the State of NY, County of NY, 100231/2021 |
Last checked: Monday Oct 18, 2021 4:48 AM EDT |
Defendant
Bangladesh Telecommunication Regulatory Commission (BTRC)
|
Represented By
|
Defendant
Veon Ltd.
|
Represented By
|
Plaintiff
Nayeem A. Chowdhury
|
Docket last updated: 1 hours ago |
Friday, May 19, 2023 | ||
misc
Mailing Receipt
Fri 05/19 9:19 AM
MAILING RECEIPT: Document No: 108. Mailed to: Nayeem A. Chowdhury 205 Grand Street #14 New York, NY 10013. (kh) |
||
misc
Mailing Receipt
Fri 05/19 9:20 AM
MAILING RECEIPT: Document No: 109. Mailed to: Nayeem A. Chowdhury 205 Grand Street #14 New York, NY 10013. (kh) |
||
Thursday, May 18, 2023 | ||
109 | 109
![]() CLERK'S JUDGMENT re:108 Order in favor of Veon Ltd. against Nayeem A. Chowdhury. It is hereby ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED: That for the reasons stated in the Court's Order dated May 18, 2023, the docket reflects that Plaintiff did not file a second amended complaint by May 5, 2023. Instead, by letter dated May 17, 2023, over two years after this case was first filed, he asked the Court to allow him additional time of unspecified length to engage legal counsel. Dkt. 105. That request, which was not filed forty-eight hours before his deadline to file a second amended complaint, as is required by 3.B of the Court's Individual Rules and Practices in Civil Cases, but was instead filed nearly two weeks after the deadline, identifies no extraordinary circumstance that would justify granting a further extension. The request is therefore denied and judgment is entered in favor of Defendants, dismissing this case without prejudice; accordingly, the case is closed. (Signed by Clerk of Court Ruby Krajick on 5/18/2023) (km) |
|
Att: 1
![]() |
||
108 | 108
![]() ORDER The docket reflects that Plaintiff did not file a second amended complaint by May 5, 2023. Instead, by letter dated May 17, 2023, over two years after this case was first filed, he asks the Court to allow him additional time of unspecified length to engage legal counsel. Dkt. 105. That request, which was not filed forty-eight hours before his deadline to file a second amended complaint, as is required by 3.B of the Court's Individual Rules and Practices in Civil Cases, but was instead filed nearly two weeks after the deadline, identifies no extraordinary circumstance that would justify granting a further extension. The request is therefore denied. The Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to enter judgment in favor of Defendants, dismissing this case without prejudice. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge John P. Cronan on 5/18/2023) (jca) |
|
107 | 107
![]() CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE of Letter Opposition to Request for Extension served on Nayeem A. Chowdhury on May 18, 2023. Service was made by email and UPS. Document filed by Veon Ltd...(Walsh, Michael) |
|
106 | 106
![]() LETTER addressed to Judge John P. Cronan from Michael R. Walsh dated May 18, 2023 re: Opposition to Nayeem A. Chowdhury's Request for Further Extension. Document filed by Veon Ltd...(Walsh, Michael) |
|
Wednesday, May 17, 2023 | ||
105 | 105
![]() LETTER addressed to Judge John P. Cronan from N. Chowdhury, dated 5/17/23 re: "APPOINTMENT OF LEGAL COUNSEL"- This instant suit has reached a juncture where the overall complexity of issues involved are such that it is truly beyond the logistical capacity and capabilities of myself as a Pro Se Plaintiff which is further exacerbated by the gravity of the hardship I am faced with etc. Given the above, I am compelled to seek legal counsel and expertise and am in the process of engaging legal counsel etc. I seek time and leave from the Court to set in motion these arrangements. Document filed by Nayeem A. Chowdhury.(sc) |