Court records

049_8

Text as released

Machine-read from the scan. Names, dates and numbers can be misread — check anything you rely on against the original page.

Case 9:09-cv-80469-KAM Document 49 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/22/2009 Page 1 of 3

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

NO. 09-80469-CIV-MARRA/JOHNSON

JANE DOE II,

Plaintiff,
v.

JEFFREY EPSTEIN and
SARAH KELLEN,

Defendants.
_______________________________________/

ORDER SETTING ASIDE DEFAULT AGAINST DEFENDANT SARAH KELLEN
AND REQUIRING KELLEN TO RESPOND TO COMPLAINT
ON OR BEFORE AUGUST 3, 2009

THIS CAUSE is before the Court on Defendant Sarah Kellen’s (“Defendant” or

“Kellen”) Motion to Set Aside Order of Default (DE 42), filed June 23, 2009. The motion is

fully briefed and ripe for review. The Court has reviewed the motion, response, reply, and the

record and is otherwise fully advised in the premises.

On June 17, 2009, the Court entered an Order of Default Against Defendant Sarah Kellen

(DE 39). In that Order, the Court stated that it “has reviewed the affidavit of service

accompanying Plaintiff’s motion for default against Kellen and concludes that Plaintiff effected

service on Defendant Kellen in a manner authorized by New York state law.” See DE 39, citing

N.Y.C.P.L.R. § 308(4). The Court concluded that, because Defendant Kellen failed to timely

answer the complaint or otherwise respond thereto, Plaintiff was entitled to an Order of Default

1
Case 9:09-cv-80469-KAM Document 49 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/22/2009 Page 2 of 3

against Kellen. --
Id.

In her motion to set aside default, Kellen argues that (1) the process server failed to

exercise “due diligence” before resorting to New York “nail and mail” service; (2) the entry of

default was premature because Plaintiff did not file her proof of service until she filed her motion

for

[…]