AS Beauty Group LLC v. Guangzhou Aolimei Cosmetics Co., Ltd.
- Garnett
- 1:24-cv-08461
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In AS Beauty Group v. Guangzhou Aolimei, Judge Garnett granted a stay while service under the Hague Convention is completed.
AS Beauty Group LLC and Guangzhou Aolimei Cosmetics Co., Ltd.; the case is paused until service on Guangzhou Aolimei is completed, and AS Beauty must provide periodic status updates.
What happened
In AS Beauty Group LLC v. Guangzhou Aolimei Cosmetics Co., Ltd., AS Beauty told the court that it had not yet served Guangzhou Aolimei. It had started the process for service in China under an international treaty called the Hague Convention.
AS Beauty said service could take four to six months and asked the court to pause the case because a request for service was still pending. It also explained that a filing had been incorrectly labeled as showing completed service.
Judge Margaret M. Garnett granted the application. She adjourned the deadlines from the February 19 order indefinitely and stayed all proceedings until service is completed. AS Beauty must update the court by May 21, 2025, and every 90 days afterward.
The detailed version
- AS Beauty Group LLC v. Guangzhou Aolimei Cosmetics Co., Ltd. · No. 1:24-cv-08461
- Garnett
- Feb. 21, 2025
Background
AS Beauty Group LLC told the court that it had not completed service of the complaint on Guangzhou Aolimei Cosmetics Co., Ltd. AS Beauty had been unable to locate an address for the defendant in New York but had located an address in China. After receiving no response to its request that the defendant’s listed U.S. Patent and Trademark Office attorneys waive service, AS Beauty began service through the Hague Convention, an international process for serving court papers abroad.
AS Beauty submitted a request for service to China’s Ministry of Justice on January 28, 2025, and filed that request in the case on February 4, 2025. The request remained pending, and AS Beauty said its vendor estimated that service would take four to six months. AS Beauty also clarified that a filing labeled “Summons Returned Executed” actually contained the request for service abroad and translated documents; it did not show that service had been completed.
Application and Ruling
AS Beauty argued that a motion for default judgment was premature because service had not been completed and asked the court to stay the action while service proceeded. The court granted the application. Judge Margaret M. Garnett adjourned, or postponed indefinitely, the dates and deadlines set in the court’s February 19 order. The court ordered that all proceedings be stayed pending service of the defendant under the Hague Convention.
The court also ordered AS Beauty to file a letter about the status of service no later than May 21, 2025, and every 90 days after that. The Clerk of Court was directed to terminate Docket No. 15. The provided text does not describe the underlying claims or decide their merits.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.