Guo v. Perry
- Sarah Netburn
- 1:23-cv-00119
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Guo v. Perry, Judge Netburn arranged service of the lawsuit and extended the plaintiff’s deadline to serve the defendant.
Plaintiff Lun Guo and Defendant Marjorie Mae Perry; the order also directed attorneys Ryan Besinque and Lauren Brangman regarding service of the lawsuit.
What happened
In Guo v. Perry, plaintiff Lun Guo told the court that attorneys Ryan Besinque and Lauren Brangman had agreed to help serve the lawsuit on defendant Marjorie Mae Perry. Guo was proceeding without a lawyer.
The court asked the Clerk to issue and mail the summons, complaint, Guo’s letter, and the order to Besinque. It asked Besinque to serve Brangman on Perry’s behalf, either in person at the next family court hearing or by mail, by July 11, 2023.
Judge Sarah Netburn extended Guo’s deadline to serve Perry until July 14, 2023. After service of the summons and complaint, Perry would have 21 days to answer or otherwise respond.
The detailed version
- Guo v. Perry · No. 1:23-cv-00119
- Sarah Netburn
- June 13, 2023
Background
Plaintiff Lun Guo, who was proceeding without a lawyer, informed the court on June 9, 2023, that Lauren Brangman, Defendant Marjorie Mae Perry’s family court attorney, had agreed to accept service on Perry’s behalf. Guo also reported that Guo’s family court attorney, Ryan Besinque, had agreed to serve Brangman.
Order
The court asked the Clerk of Court to prepare and issue a summons to Perry and mail the summons, a copy of the complaint, Guo’s June 9 letter, and the order to Besinque. The court respectfully requested that Besinque serve Brangman, on Perry’s behalf, with those four documents. Besinque could serve Brangman in person at the next family court hearing or by mail. The order stated that service by mail had to be sent no later than July 11, 2023.
The court extended Guo’s time to serve Perry until July 14, 2023. Once Perry was served with the summons and complaint, she would have 21 days to answer or otherwise respond to the complaint. Judge Sarah Netburn signed the order as a United States Magistrate Judge.
Disposition and Classification
This was an order addressing service of process—the formal delivery of the summons and complaint—not the merits of Guo’s claims. The court arranged the requested service process and extended the service deadline. The order is classified as a procedural order.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.