Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled June 27, 2023

Walker v. Monica Rich Kosann

Judge
John Cronan
Docket
1:23-cv-04409
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
4
Civil ProcedurePro Se
In one sentence

In Walker v. Monica Rich Kosann, Judge Cronan ordered U.S. Marshals service for an IFP plaintiff and extended the service deadline.

Who this affects

Andrew Walker, Jr. and the defendants named for service—Monica Rich Kosann, Amazon Advertising LLC, eBay Inc., Provenance Gems, Fisher-Price, and Woodrow Jewelers—are affected by the service instructions and deadline.

What happened

Walker v. Monica Rich Kosann involves Andrew Walker, Jr., who is representing himself and alleges that the defendants infringed his patented trademark. The court had already allowed him to proceed without paying filing fees in advance.

Because Walker was allowed to proceed without prepaying fees, the court ordered the Clerk of Court to prepare service forms, issue summonses, and send the necessary papers to the U.S. Marshals Service for service on the defendants.

The court extended Walker’s service deadline to 90 days after the summonses are issued and said he should request more time if service is not completed by then. Judge Cronan also directed Walker to notify the court of any address change; the order did not decide whether infringement occurred.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
Walker v. Monica Rich Kosann · No. 1:23-cv-04409
Judge
John Cronan
Date
June 27, 2023

Background

Andrew Walker, Jr. filed this action against Monica Rich Kosann and other defendants, alleging infringement of his patented trademark. Walker is proceeding without a lawyer. The court had previously granted his request to proceed without prepaying filing fees.

Service of Process

Because Walker was allowed to proceed without prepaying fees, federal law permits him to rely on the court and the U.S. Marshals Service to serve the defendants. The court instructed the Clerk of Court to complete U.S. Marshals Service Process Receipt and Return forms, issue summonses, and deliver the documents needed for service to the Marshals Service. The order identifies Monica Rich Kosann, Amazon Advertising LLC, eBay Inc., Provenance Gems, Fisher-Price, and Woodrow Jewelers as defendants for service. The attached service-address list appears to spell the gems company as “Provence Gems,” while the body of the order identifies it as “Provenance Gems.”

Deadline and Other Instructions

The usual service deadline is 90 days after the complaint is filed. Because Walker could not serve the complaint and summonses before the court reviewed the complaint and ordered the summonses issued, the court extended his deadline to 90 days after the summonses are issued. The court said Walker should request an extension if the complaint is not served within that period. It also required him to notify the court in writing if his address changes and warned that the action may be dismissed if he fails to do so.

Result

This is an order about service and case administration. It does not decide whether the defendants infringed Walker’s alleged trademark. The Clerk of Court was directed to complete the service forms, provide the service materials to the Marshals Service, and mail Walker an information package. The order also provided information about a free legal clinic for people representing themselves in civil cases.

The authoritative version

Read the full 4-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.