Nwosu v. Hilton WorldWide, Inc. et al
| Adaeze Nwosu |
| The Ritz-Carlton Hotel Company, L.L.C., Marriott International, Inc., Hilton WorldWide, Inc., David Morrison, Nancy Orlarei, Chris Song, Rishi Malhotra, Roman Dauze and Emma Poplin |
| 1:2024cv07918 |
| October 16, 2024 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of New York |
| Foley Square Office |
| Laura Taylor Swain |
| Other Fraud |
| 28 U.S.C. § 1441 nr Notice of Removal |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on November 4, 2024. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Received e-mail from the United States District Court - Eastern District of Virginia acknowledging receipt of transferred case. Assigned Case Number: 1:24-cv-01959, filed on 11/4/2024..(tro) |
| Appeal Record Sent to USCA (Electronic File). Certified Indexed record on Appeal Electronic Files for #8 Notice of Appeal filed by Adaeze Nwosu were transmitted to the U.S. Court of Appeals. (tp) |
| Transmission of Notice of Appeal and Certified Copy of Docket Sheet to US Court of Appeals re: #8 Notice of Appeal. (tp) |
| Filing 8 NOTICE OF APPEAL from #7 Order. Document filed by Adaeze Nwosu. Form D-P is due within 14 days to the Court of Appeals, Second Circuit. (tp) |
| Appeal Remark as to #8 Notice of Appeal filed by Adaeze Nwosu. IFP Denied 10/24/2024. (tp) |
| Appeal Fee Due: for #8 Notice of Appeal. Appeal fee due by 11/12/2024. (tp) |
| CASE TRANSFERRED OUT ELECTRONICALLY from the U.S.D.C. Southern District of New York to the United States District Court - District of Eastern District of Virginia. (mml) |
Filing 7
TRANSFER ORDER: The Clerk of Court is directed to transfer this action to the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia. Whether Plaintiff should be permitted to proceed further without prepayment of fees is a determination to be made by the transferee court. A summons shall not issue from this Court. This order closes the case in the Southern District of New York. The Court certifies, under 28 U.S.C. 1915(a)(3), that any appeal from this order would not be taken in good faith, and therefore in forma pauperis status is denied for the purpose of an appeal. See Coppedge v. United States, 369 U.S. 438, 444-45 (1962). SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Laura Taylor Swain on 10/23/2024) (mml) Transmission to Office of the Clerk of Court for processing. Modified on 10/24/2024 (mml).
|
| NOTICE OF CASE REASSIGNMENT - SUA SPONTE to Judge Laura Taylor Swain. Judge Unassigned is no longer assigned to the case. (laq) |
|
Filing 6
STANDING ORDER IN RE CASES FILED BY PRO SE PLAINTIFFS (See 24-MISC-127 Standing Order filed March 18, 2024). To ensure that all cases heard in the Southern District of New York are handled promptly and efficiently, all parties must keep the court apprised of any new contact information. It is a party's obligation to provide an address for service; service of court orders cannot be accomplished if a party does not update the court when a change of address occurs. Accordingly, all self-represented litigants are hereby ORDERED to inform the court of each change in their address or electronic contact information. Parties may #consent to electronic service to receive notifications of court filings by email, rather than relying on regular mail delivery. Parties may also ask the court for #permission to file documents electronically. Forms, including instructions for consenting to electronic service and requesting permission to file documents electronically, may be found by clicking on the hyperlinks in this order, or by accessing the forms on the courts website, nysd.uscourts.gov/forms. The procedures that follow apply only to cases filed by pro se plaintiffs. If the court receives notice from the United States Postal Service that an order has been returned to the court, or otherwise receives information that the address of record for a self-represented plaintiff is no longer valid, the court may issue an Order to Show Cause why the case should not be dismissed without prejudice for failure to comply with this order. Such order will be sent to the plaintiffs last known address and will also be viewable on the court's electronic docket. A notice directing the parties' attention to this order shall be docketed (and mailed to any self-represented party that has appeared and has not consented to electronic service) upon the opening of each case or miscellaneous matter that is classified as pro se in the court's records. (Signed by Judge Laura Taylor Swain on 3/18/2024) (gp)
|
| CASE MANAGEMENT NOTE: For each electronic filing made in a case involving a self-represented party who has not consented to electronic service, the filing party must serve the document on such self-represented party in a manner permitted by Fed. R. Civ. P. 5(b)(2) (other than through the ECF system) and file proof of service for each document so served. Please see #Rule 9.2 of the courts ECF Rules & Instructions for further information..(gp) |
| Filing 5 MOTION for Permission for Adaeze Nwosu to participate in electronic case filing in this case. Document filed by Adaeze Nwosu..(gp) |
| Filing 4 PRO SE CONSENT TO RECEIVE ELECTRONIC SERVICE. The following party: Adaeze Nwosu consents to receive electronic service via the ECF system. Document filed by Adaeze Nwosu..(gp) |
| Filing 3 CIVIL COVER SHEET filed..(gp) |
| Filing 2 REQUEST TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS. Document filed by Adaeze Nwosu..(gp) |
| Filing 1 NOTICE OF REMOVAL.Document filed by Adaeze Nwosu..(gp) |
| Case Designated ECF. (gp) |
Access additional case information on PACER
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the New York Southern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
