In Re AZAD ALAMGIR KABIR v. U.S. Dist. Ct. for D.C., 542 U.S. 367, 380-81 2004 . Dr. Kabir has shown no clear

NOTE: This order is nonprecedential.
United States Court of Appeals
for the Federal Circuit
______________________
In Re AZAD ALAMGIR KABIR,
Petitioner
______________________
2026-128
______________________
On Petition for Writ of Mandamus to the United States
District Court for the District of New Jersey in No. 2:25-cv-
15207-EP-JSA, Judge Evelyn Padin.
______________________
ON PETITION
______________________
Before TARANTO, MAYER, and STARK, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM.
O R D E R
In the underlying patent infringement case, the district
court revoked Dr. Azad Alamgir Kabir’s privileges for filing
documents electronically using the Alternate Document
Submission (“ADS”) system, after finding he had “abused
the ADS system and burdened the Clerk of Court with nu-
merous filings that are not capable of being docketed.” Dkt.
No. 192 at 5–6. He now petitions for a writ of mandamus
seeking, among other things, to transfer or reassign the
case to “ensure reliable docket access.” Pet. at 5.
Case: 26-128 Document: 19 Page: 1 Filed: 02/24/2026

-- 1 of 2 --

IN RE KABIR 2
A writ of mandamus is an extraordinary remedy and
may only issue if petitioner has shown an indisputable
right to the relief requested and that there are no other ad-
equate means to attain that relief. Cheney v. U.S. Dist. Ct.
for D.C., 542 U.S. 367, 380–81 (2004). Dr. Kabir has shown
no clear and indisputable right to file documents via
CM/ECF or ADS, and at least for that reason, has shown
no right to transfer or to disturb the district court’s rulings
regarding such privileges. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 5(d)(3)(B)(i)
(explaining a self-represented litigant “may file electroni-
cally only if allowed by court order or by local rule”).1 As to
Dr. Kabir’s other challenges on the merits of his case, in-
cluding his entitlement to filing another amended com-
plaint, we cannot say that a post-judgment appeal is
inadequate.
Accordingly,
IT IS ORDERED THAT:
The petition is denied.
February 24, 2026
Date
FOR THE COURT
1 Dr. Kabir appears to express confusion as to how to
file with the district court, but the February 3, 2026 order
does not restrict his filing via mail, courthouse drop box, or
delivery to that court’s Clerk’s Office. See D.N.J. Alterna-
tive Document Submission at 2 (explaining “the other filing
methods provided for self-represented litigants”).
Case: 26-128 Document: 19 Page: 2 Filed: 02/24/2026

-- 2 of 2 --