Cawthon v. Yaoyage
- Rearden
- 1:22-cv-07279
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 5
In Cawthon v. Yaoyage, Judge Rearden stayed the case pending appellate guidance on serving a defendant in China by email.
Scott Cawthon and Yaoyage. The case is paused, Cawthon’s pending alternative-service motion was terminated, and Cawthon must provide a status update after the Second Circuit decides Smart Study.
What happened
In Cawthon v. Yaoyage, Scott Cawthon asked to serve Yaoyage by email instead of using the usual method for serving someone in another country. Cawthon argued that email service was allowed under the federal rules and the treaty governing service of legal documents abroad.
The court paused the case because the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit was considering related questions in Smart Study Co., Ltd. v. Acuteye US. The court said a decision in that appeal could clarify whether email service on a defendant in China is permitted and whether a later default judgment could be entered.
Judge Jennifer H. Rearden ordered the case stayed and directed the Clerk of Court to terminate Cawthon’s pending motion. Cawthon must provide a status update within seven days after the Second Circuit decides Smart Study; he may also ask to lift the stay if he wants to serve Yaoyage under the treaty.
The detailed version
- Cawthon v. Yaoyage · No. 1:22-cv-07279
- Rearden
- Apr. 5, 2023
Background
Scott Cawthon sought permission to serve Yaoyage, whom he described as an individual in a foreign country, through alternative service by email. Cawthon argued that email service on a defendant located in China is permitted under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(f)(3), which allows service by means not prohibited by an international agreement. He also argued that the Hague Convention on service abroad does not prohibit email service and that public policy supported using email.
The opinion states that China is a signatory to the Hague Convention. It also notes that, in a related case, a judge had held that service by email on litigants located in China was not permitted by the Hague Convention. The legal issues were pending before the Second Circuit in Smart Study Co., Ltd. v. Acuteye US, No. 22-1810.
Reason for the Stay
A stay is a court order pausing proceedings. The court applied the factors used in the Southern District of New York for deciding whether to stay a case: the parties’ interests in proceeding or avoiding delay, the burden on the defendant, the court’s interests, the interests of nonparties, and the public interest.
The court concluded that all five considerations favored a stay. It reasoned that waiting for the Second Circuit’s decision could clarify whether Cawthon could properly serve Yaoyage by email and whether a later default judgment could be entered. The court also found that a stay would protect Yaoyage’s rights under the Hague Convention and the federal rules, give the court guidance on personal jurisdiction, clarify the United States’ and China’s treaty obligations, and reduce potential conflicts among courts.
Disposition
The court ordered the Clerk of Court to mark the case as stayed and to terminate Cawthon’s pending motion at ECF No. 15. Within seven days after the Second Circuit decides Smart Study, Cawthon must file a letter updating the court on the case, including whether the stay should be lifted and whether he intends to continue prosecuting the case. The court also stated that Cawthon may request that the stay be lifted if he wishes to serve Yaoyage under the Hague Convention.
The opinion did not decide whether email service on Yaoyage is permitted. The ruling was issued by United States District Judge Jennifer H. Rearden.
Read the full 5-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.