Everytown for Gun Safety Action Fund, Inc. v. Defcad, Inc.

Background

Everytown for Gun Safety Action Fund, Inc. brought a trademark-infringement action against Defcad, Inc., Phillip Royster, and several defendants identified by online usernames. Everytown had also asked for a preliminary injunction. The defendants argued that the court lacked personal jurisdiction—the authority to exercise legal power over a defendant.

The anonymous defendants asked to continue litigating without revealing their identities, including while pursuing a planned motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction. The case had involved expedited discovery intended to identify the defendants. Earlier orders required the production of identifying information, and the defendants’ efforts to preserve anonymity had limited the case’s progress. The Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit denied requests to stay those discovery orders.

Court’s reasoning

The court stated that parties generally may not litigate anonymously. It concluded that the anonymous defendants’ identities and addresses at the time the complaint was filed were necessary to decide whether the court had personal jurisdiction over them. Without that information, the court said, resolving personal jurisdiction would be premature or difficult. The court also said it would not credit anonymous, unsigned declarations submitted by the defendants because it had previously ruled that those declarations had no evidentiary value, and the defendants had not provided contrary authority.

Disposition

Judge Gardephe denied the anonymous defendants’ application to proceed anonymously. The court ordered them to disclose their names and addresses as of October 22, 2021, to Everytown and the court by June 3, 2022. This order did not resolve the defendants’ personal-jurisdiction challenge or Everytown’s preliminary-injunction application.