Sargsyan v. Amazon.com Inc., No. 2:25-cv-1257-JNW (2025)

Case details
Full caption
Artur Sargsyan v. Amazon.com Inc.
Country
United States
Jurisdiction
Federal
Decided
2025
Disposition
Motion Denied
Majority
United States (J.) (unanimous Court)
ORDER - 1 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE ARTUR SARGSYAN, Plaintiff, v. AMAZON.COM INC, Defendant. CASE NO. 2:25-cv-1257-JNW ORDER Plaintiff’s motion to “proceed toward default judgment without U.S. Marshal service” comes before the Court. Dkt. No. 26. On September 16, 2025, the Court directed the Clerk of the Court to send the following to Defendant by first class mail: (a) a copy of Plaintiff’s complaint, (b) a copy of this Order, (c) two copies of the notice of lawsuit and request for waiver of service of summons, (d) a waiver of service of summons, and (e) a return envelope, postage prepaid, addressed to the Clerk’s Office. Dkt. No. 15. The Clerk mailed these documents on September 17, 2025. Consistent with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(d), the Court gave Defendant 30 days from the day the documents were Case 2:25-cv-01257-JNW Document 27 Filed 10/17/25 Page 1 of 3
ORDER - 2 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 sent to respond. Otherwise, the Court would direct service by the U.S. Marshals. Id. Defendant did not respond within 30 days. Plaintiff misunderstands Rule 4(d). The waiver process is optional for defendants. When a defendant returns a signed waiver, service is complete. When a defendant does not return a waiver, service has not been accomplished. The plaintiff must still effect service through other authorized means under Rule 4. Only after valid service is established may default proceedings begin. The consequence of a defendant’s refusal to waive service is that the defendant may be ordered to pay the costs of service under Rule 4(d)(2)—not that service is deemed complete. Thus, there is no legal basis to “proceed” without serving Defendant, as Plaintiff requests. Consistent with its prior order, Dkt. No. 15, the Court ORDERS the U.S. Marshals to serve Defendant. The address for Amazon.com, Inc.’s office is 410 Terry Avenue North, Seattle, Washington 98109. Finally, it appears Plaintiff has cited made-up case law, as the Court is unable to verify the existence of “Board of Trustees v. RBS Group, 2008 WL 5127215” in any legal database. See Dkt. No. 26 at 2. Citation to fake or “hallucinated” legal authority violates Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 11(b)(2), which requires that legal contentions be warranted by existing law. Any future citations to fake law will subject Plaintiff to sanctions under Rule 11. Case 2:25-cv-01257-JNW Document 27 Filed 10/17/25 Page 2 of 3
ORDER - 3 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 The Court DENIES Plaintiff’s motion. Dkt. No. 26. Dated this 17th day of October, 2025. Jamal N. Whitehead United States District Judge Case 2:25-cv-01257-JNW Document 27 Filed 10/17/25 Page 3 of 3
ProvenanceKnow exactly where this document came from.Members see the sourcing behind every authority on DocPost — so you can check the record yourself and cite with confidence.Request access