Gladyshev v. Shea

Background

Eduard Gladyshev filed this action without a lawyer and paid the filing fee. He listed himself and NYCHA Corp. as plaintiffs, and named Josephina Shea, John Doe, and brandprotection.org as defendants. The complaint invoked federal-question jurisdiction and sought money damages.

Gladyshev alleged that, on March 30, 2020, a defendant filed a false patent-infringement claim with Amazon.com on behalf of another entity. He alleged that the defendant lacked authorization to enforce that entity’s intellectual-property rights and that the act caused lost sales, lost inventory, legal fees, and a possible suspension of his Amazon.com seller account. The court noted that the complaint did not identify specific actions by particular defendants and did not provide addresses or other identifying information for the defendants.

Claims involving NYCHA Corp.

The court held that Gladyshev could not represent NYCHA Corp. because corporations may not appear in federal court without a lawyer. The court also held that a person representing himself cannot act on behalf of another party. Accordingly, Gladyshev could not proceed without a lawyer on NYCHA Corp.’s behalf.

Failure to state a claim

The court analyzed Gladyshev’s reliance on 18 U.S.C. § 287, a criminal statute concerning false claims presented to United States officers or agencies. The court held that individuals cannot bring a private civil lawsuit under that statute because it does not provide a private right of action. The court further held that the factual allegations were too sparse to plausibly support another claim for relief. It therefore found that Gladyshev failed to state a claim upon which relief could be granted under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii), even though he had paid the filing fee.

Personal jurisdiction

Personal jurisdiction means the court’s legal authority over a defendant. The court found that Gladyshev had not alleged facts showing that the defendants were domiciled in New York, continuously and systematically conducted business there, or were otherwise subject to New York’s jurisdiction. Gladyshev stated that the events occurred in Seattle, Washington, and did not allege facts showing that New York’s long-arm statute applied. The court therefore found that he had not established personal jurisdiction over the defendants.

Venue

Venue concerns the proper federal district for a lawsuit. The court found that Gladyshev had not alleged that he or the defendants resided in the Southern District of New York, or that a substantial part of the events occurred there. Gladyshev stated that he resided in Kings County, which the court identified as being in the Eastern District of New York, and stated that the events occurred in Seattle. The court therefore concluded that venue did not appear to be proper in the Southern District of New York, even if Gladyshev could state a viable claim.

Disposition and leave to amend

The court dismissed the action and granted Gladyshev 30 days to file an amended complaint. The court directed that the amended complaint demonstrate proper venue and personal jurisdiction and explain who violated his federally protected rights, what facts showed a violation, when and where it occurred, and why he was entitled to relief. The court stated that an amended complaint would completely replace, rather than supplement, the original complaint. The Clerk was directed to keep the matter open until a civil judgment was entered. If Gladyshev did not timely amend and did not show good cause for failing to do so, the court would enter a civil judgment consistent with the order and terminate the matter.