Opinion
9-cv-9986 (RA) 9-cv-9987 (RA)
09-29-2021
ORDER
RONNIE ABRAMS, United States District Judge.
On August 31, 2021, the Court granted Defendants' motions to compel arbitration in these actions, and stayed the actions pending resolution of the arbitration. See Dkt. 61 (19-CV-9986); Dkt. 52 (19-CV-9987). Plaintiff has now filed notices of interlocutory appeal as well as motions for an extension of time to file notices of appeal. See Dkts. 62, 63 (19-CV-9986); Dkts. 53, 54 (19-CV-9987).
The motions for extension of time are denied because there is no basis for an interlocutory appeal at this time. The Court has not issued any orders from which an appeal may properly be taken. See Katz v. Cellco P'ship, 794 F.3d 341, 346 (2d Cir. 2015) (“The [Federal Arbitration Act] explicitly denies the right to an immediate appeal from an interlocutory order that compels arbitration or stays proceedings.”). Here, the Court has both compelled arbitration and stayed the proceedings. Nor has the Court certified an interlocutory appeal pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1292(b).
To the extent Plaintiff wishes to consult with an attorney regarding the Court's decision, he is advised to contact the New York Legal Assistance Group's pro se clinic, by visiting its website at nylag.org/pro-se-clinic/ or by calling (212) 659-6190. This clinic, which is neither part of nor run by the Court, assists pro se litigants with federal civil cases.
The Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to terminate the motions requesting an extension of time and to mail a copy of this order to Mr. Aboul.
SO ORDERED.