XYZ Corp. v. Individuals
XYZ Corp. v. Individuals, Corporations, Limited Liability Companies, Partnerships, and Unincorporated Associations Identified on Schedule A to the Complaint
- Lorna Schofield
- 1:24-cv-01962
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 4
In XYZ Corp. v. Individuals, Judge Schofield granted XYZ Corp.’s request to serve BarclayStudioStore by registered email.
XYZ Corp. may serve BarclayStudioStore by registered email under the order. The order concerns service only and does not decide the trademark-infringement claims against any defendant.
What happened
In XYZ Corp. v. Individuals, XYZ Corp. alleged that 107 defendants infringed its trademark for artwork. The order concerns one defendant, BarclayStudioStore, whom the motion identified as living in Lithuania.
XYZ Corp. said it had tried to serve BarclayStudioStore through Lithuania’s central authority, but the address was incorrect. It also described additional efforts to find a valid address and asked to serve the defendant by registered email.
Judge Lorna G. Schofield found that the address was unknown, so the Hague Convention did not apply, and that email service was reasonably likely to notify BarclayStudioStore. She granted the request for alternative service.
The detailed version
- XYZ Corp. v. Individuals · No. 1:24-cv-01962
- Lorna Schofield
- June 4, 2024
Background
XYZ Corp. brought this trademark-infringement action against 107 defendants. The order addresses XYZ Corp.’s request to serve one defendant, BarclayStudioStore, by registered email. The motion stated that BarclayStudioStore resides in Lithuania, a signatory to the Hague Convention on service of documents abroad.
XYZ Corp. had attempted service through the Lithuanian Central Authority at the address BarclayStudioStore gave Etsy, Inc. for its online storefront. The authority confirmed that the address was incorrect. XYZ Corp. also reported additional online investigation into BarclayStudioStore’s true name, business name, email address, and physical address.
Court’s Analysis
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(f)(3) allows a court to order service on an individual in another country by a method not prohibited by an international agreement. New York law also permits a court to direct another method of personal service when traditional methods are impracticable.
The court found that XYZ Corp. had exercised sufficient diligence to establish that BarclayStudioStore’s address was unknown. Because the Hague Convention applies only when the defendant’s address is known, the court concluded that the Convention did not apply here. The court then considered whether registered email would satisfy due process, meaning whether it was reasonably calculated to notify BarclayStudioStore of the case and give the defendant an opportunity to object. Because XYZ Corp. had communicated with BarclayStudioStore by email, the court found that registered email was reasonably likely to reach the defendant.
Disposition
The court granted XYZ Corp.’s request for alternative service. The order did not decide whether BarclayStudioStore infringed XYZ Corp.’s trademark or resolve the merits of the lawsuit.
Read the full 4-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.