Starostenko v. UBS AG (A Swiss Bank)

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK YURI STAROSTENKO and IRINA TSAREVA, Plaintiffs, 19 Civ. 9993 (KPF) - v. - ORDER OF SERVICE UBS AG BANK, Defendant. KATHERINE POLK FAILLA, District Judge: Plaintiffs Yuri Starostenko and Irina Tsareva, appearing pro se, bring this action pursuant to the Court’s federal question and diversity jurisdiction, 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 and 1332. By Order dated November 8, 2019, the Court granted Plaintiffs’ request to proceed without prepayment of fees, that is, in forma pauperis. Because Plaintiffs have been granted permission to proceed IFP, they are entitled to rely on the Court and the U.S. Marshals Service to effect service. Walker v. Schult, 717 F.3d. 119, 123 n.6 (2d Cir. 2013); see also 28 U.S.C. § 1915(d) (“The officers of the court shall issue and serve all process … in [IFP] cases.”); Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(c)(3) (the court must order the Marshals Service to serve if the plaintiff is authorized to proceed IFP)). On November 25, 2019, the Court ordered the Clerk of Court to mail Plaintiffs a U.S. Marshals Service Process Receipt and Return form (USM-285 form). (Dkt. #10). The Court stated that if Plaintiffs wished to have the U.S. Marshals serve process on their behalf, they should complete the form, provide Defendant’s New York address, and return the form to the Pro Se Intake Unit of the Court. (Id.). The Court stated that upon its receipt, the Clerk of Court should issue a summons and deliver to the Marshals Service all the paperwork necessary for the Marshals

Service to effect service upon Defendant in New York. (Id.). On December 30, 2019, Plaintiffs returned the USM-285 form to the Court indicating that the Marshals should serve Defendant at the following address: Cede & Co. (DTC), 55 Water St., Ste Conc4, New York, NY 10041. (Dkt. #15). The Marshals subsequently served the summons and complaint in this action on the address provided by Plaintiffs. (Dkt. #18). On January 28, 2020, Plaintiffs received an email from a representative of Cede & Co. stating that it had received a copy of the summons and complaint in this action but

explaining that it is not an agent of UBS AG and is not authorized to accept service on its behalf. (Id.). Accordingly, on February 20, 2020, the Court received a letter from Plaintiffs indicating that they have not yet been able to serve Defendant and asking for an extension of time to complete service. (Dkt. #18). Plaintiffs’ request is GRANTED. Further, to allow Plaintiff to effect service on Defendant UBS AG through the U.S. Marshals Service, the Clerk of Court is instructed to fill out two USM-

285 forms for UBS AG. The first one should be filled out using the potential service address provided by Plaintiffs in their January 30, 2020 letter (Dkt. #18): UBS AG New Branch Attn: Director Jennifer Sator 787 Seventh Avenue, 14th Floor, New York, NY 10019 The second one should be filled out with the following address: David Kelly, Managing Director UBS AG 600 Washington Boulevard Stamford, Connecticut 06901 The Clerk of Court should also deliver to the Marshals Service all the paperwork necessary for the Marshals Service to effect service upon Defendant at these two addresses. Plaintiffs should notify the Court, in writing, with respect to whether they have an additional address in the United States at which the Defendant can be served. CONCLUSION The Clerk of Court is directed to fill out the two USM-285 forms for UBS AG with the addresses listed above and to deliver to the Marshals Service all the paperwork necessary for the Marshals Service to effect service upon Defendant at these two addresses. SO ORDERED. Dated: February 21, 2020 7 New York, New York Kittens fall. flr KATHERINE POLK FAILLA United States District Judge of this Order was mailed by Chambers to: Starostenko A copy of this Order was mailed by Chambers to: 1 Hast Street & Bay Street Irina Tsareva -O. Box SS-5800 c/o Priderock Corporation □□□□□□

P.O. Box N-4816

Nassau 3 Bahamas