Ayala v. Sephora
- John Koeltl
- 1:19-cv-10214
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 4
In Ayala v. Sephora, Judge Koeltl ordered steps to serve the defendants in Maria J. Ayala’s disability-discrimination case.
Maria J. Ayala, Sephora, Jennifer Rivera, the Clerk of Court, and the U.S. Marshals Service were affected. The order required steps to serve Sephora and obtain service information for Jennifer Rivera, while requiring Ayala to monitor her address and any service deadline.
What happened
Ayala v. Sephora concerns Maria J. Ayala’s lawsuit alleging that Sephora and Jennifer Rivera discriminated against her because of her disability under the Americans with Disabilities Act. Ayala is representing herself and had permission to proceed without paying filing fees in advance.
The court said earlier attempts to serve Sephora at two addresses had failed. It extended the service deadline to 90 days after a summons is issued, directed the court clerk and U.S. Marshals Service to prepare and carry out service on Sephora, and required Ayala to notify the court if her address changes.
Judge John G. Koeltl also ordered Sephora to provide, within 60 days, information allowing the court to identify and serve Jennifer Rivera. The order addressed service of the lawsuit and did not decide whether the alleged discrimination occurred.
The detailed version
- Ayala v. Sephora · No. 1:19-cv-10214
- John Koeltl
- Sept. 28, 2020
Background
Maria J. Ayala brought this case under the Americans with Disabilities Act, alleging that her employer discriminated against her based on her disability. The defendants named in the complaint are Sephora and Jennifer Rivera, identified as a Sephora employee. Ayala is proceeding without a lawyer and had previously been granted permission to proceed without prepaying filing fees.
The court had previously issued service orders, but the U.S. Marshals Service could not serve Sephora at the store address where Ayala was employed or at Sephora’s New York headquarters. Ayala later wrote to the court and confirmed that she still wanted to litigate the case.
Service on Sephora
Because Ayala was allowed to proceed without prepaying filing fees, the court held that she could rely on the court and the U.S. Marshals Service to serve the defendants. The court extended the time for service until 90 days after the summons is issued. It stated that if service is not completed within that period, Ayala should request an extension.
The court directed the Clerk of Court to complete a U.S. Marshals Service Process Receipt and Return form for Sephora, issue a summons, and deliver the necessary documents to the Marshals Service. The court also directed the clerk to mail the order by certified mail to Sephora USA, Inc. at the listed corporate-office address. Ayala was ordered to notify the court in writing if her address changes, and the court stated that it may dismiss the action if she fails to do so.
Identifying and serving Jennifer Rivera
The court applied a rule requiring assistance to a self-represented litigant who needs help identifying and serving a defendant. It found that Ayala’s complaint gave Sephora enough information to identify Rivera and provide a service address. The court therefore ordered Sephora to provide that information within 60 days of the order. After receiving the information, the court stated that it would issue a new service order.
Disposition
This order arranged service of process and did not rule on the merits of Ayala’s disability-discrimination allegations. Judge John G. Koeltl directed the clerk to mail the order to Ayala, complete the service paperwork for Sephora, provide the documents to the Marshals Service, and mail the order by certified mail to the listed Sephora corporate office.
Read the full 4-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.