The Kyjen Company v. Individuals
The Kyjen Company, LLC v. The Individuals, Corporations, Limited Liability Companies, Partnerships, and Unincorporated Associations Identified on Schedule A to the Complaint
- Rearden
- 1:23-cv-00612
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In Kyjen v. The Individuals, Corporations, Judge Rearden ordered Plaintiff to attend a video conference about its temporary restraining-order application and alternative service.
The Kyjen Company, LLC, which was ordered to appear at the video conference; the defendants identified on Schedule A were the subject of the pending service and temporary-restraining-order issues, but the order does not impose a ruling on them.
What happened
The Kyjen Company, LLC v. The Individuals, Corporations, Limited Liability Companies, Partnerships, and Unincorporated Associations Identified on Schedule A to the Complaint concerns a court-ordered video conference. The order does not explain the underlying dispute or the requested relief in detail.
The court ordered The Kyjen Company, LLC to appear by Microsoft Teams to address, among other things, its application for a temporary restraining order and its request for alternative service. The plaintiff was also told to be prepared to discuss a decision in a different case concerning service.
Judge Jennifer H. Rearden issued the order on January 25, 2023. The opinion does not decide the temporary-restraining-order application, alternative service, or the merits of the case.
The detailed version
- The Kyjen Company v. Individuals · No. 1:23-cv-00612
- Rearden
- Jan. 25, 2023
Order
The court ordered The Kyjen Company, LLC to appear for a video conference through Microsoft Teams on January 27, 2022, at 4:00 p.m. The conference was to address, among other things, the plaintiff's application for a temporary restraining order, which is emergency relief, and alternative service, which is a request to serve defendants by a method other than the usual method.
The plaintiff was instructed to be prepared to address the court's decision concerning service in a prior related proceeding, identified in the opinion by docket number No. 21-CV-5860-GHW. The order also provided that login credentials would be sent using the email information on the docket and gave a public listen-only telephone number.
Disposition and scope
This order scheduled a conference and gave preparation instructions. It did not grant or deny the application for a temporary restraining order, rule on alternative service, or decide the merits of the case. The opinion states that the conference was to occur on January 27, 2022, even though the order is dated January 25, 2023; the text does not explain that date discrepancy.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.