Giuffre v. Prince Andrew

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - x VIRGINIA GIUFFRE, Plaintiff, -against- 21-cv-6702 (LAK) PRINCE ANDREW, DUKE OF YORK, etc., in his personal capacity, Defendant. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - x ORDER CORRECTING TYPOGRAPHICAL ERROR Footnote 8 in the memorandum and order entered on September 16, 2021 is corrected to read as follows:

E.g., NYKCool A.B. v. Pacific Intern. Services, Inc, No. 12–cv–5754 (LAK), 2015 WL 998455, *4-5 (S.D.N.Y. Mar. 5, 2015); see also Zanghi v. Ritella, No. 19-cv-5830 (NRB), 2020 WL 589409, at *7 (S.D.N.Y. Feb. 5, 2020) (“[S]ervice on a foreign defendant’s U.S. counsel ‘is a common form of service ordered under Rule 4(f)(3).’”) (quoting Jian Zhang v. Biang.com, Inc., 293 F.R.D. 508, 515 (S.D.N.Y. 2013)); GLG Life Tech, 287 F.R.D. 262, 267 (S.D.N.Y. 2012) (“In many instances, courts have authorized service under Rule 4(f)(3) on an unserved party’s counsel.”). SO ORDERED. Dated: September 17, 2021 __________/_s_/ _L_e_w_i_s_ A__. _K_a_p_la_n_ _ _/P_C__M_____________ Lewis A. Kaplan United States District Judge