Sergey Firsov v. Scandinavian Airlines System Denmark-Norway-Sweden
- Alex Tse
- 3:26-cv-08076
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 3
In Sergey Firsov v. Scandinavian Airlines, Judge Tse granted a service-based dismissal motion and extension, but denied amendment.
Sergey Firsov must file proof that Scandinavian Airlines System Denmark-Norway-Sweden was served through a Hague Convention-approved method by December 14, 2026, or the court may dismiss the action without prejudice if he does not show good cause for more time. His proposed amendment seeking punitive damages under 49 U.S.C. § 41712 cannot be added.
What happened
Sergey Firsov v. Scandinavian Airlines System Denmark-Norway-Sweden concerns Firsov’s attempt to serve the airline, which the court described as a foreign entity based in Stockholm, Sweden. Sweden is part of an international agreement governing service of court papers abroad.
The court ruled that Firsov’s personal service did not comply with that agreement because he did not submit a request to Sweden’s Central Authority. It granted the airline’s motion to dismiss for insufficient service and canceled the attempted service. The court also granted Firsov 90 additional days, until December 14, 2026, to file proof of proper service.
The court denied Firsov’s request to amend his complaint to seek punitive damages under 49 U.S.C. § 41712, reasoning that the statute does not provide a private right to sue. Judge Alex G. Tse said the case will be dismissed without prejudice for failure to serve the airline if Firsov does not file proof of proper service or show good cause for another extension.
The detailed version
- Sergey Firsov v. Scandinavian Airlines System Denmark-Norway-Sweden · No. 3:26-cv-08076
- Alex Tse
- Sept. 15, 2026
Background
The order addresses three motions: the defendant’s motion to dismiss, the plaintiff’s request for more time to serve the defendant, and the plaintiff’s request for permission to amend the first amended complaint.
The opinion states that Scandinavian Airlines System Denmark-Norway-Sweden is a foreign entity with its principal place of business in Stockholm, Sweden. Because Sweden is a party to the Hague Convention on the Service Abroad of Judicial and Extrajudicial Documents in Civil or Commercial Matters, the court held that service had to use a method approved by that Convention.
Motion to Dismiss
The court granted the defendant’s motion under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(5), which addresses insufficient service of process. Firsov attempted personal service without submitting a request to Sweden’s Central Authority. The court held that this method did not comply with the Hague Convention, granted the motion to dismiss, and quashed, or canceled, the attempted service.
Extension of Time
The court granted Firsov’s request for 90 additional days to serve the defendant. It ordered Firsov to file proof of service using a Convention-approved method by December 14, 2026. The court stated that, if he does not do so and does not otherwise show good cause for another extension, it will dismiss the action without prejudice for failure to serve the defendant with process.
Leave to Amend
Firsov sought permission to amend the first amended complaint to add a request for punitive damages under 49 U.S.C. § 41712. The proposed amendment was based on allegations that the defendant placed Firsov on a no-fly list in retaliation for filing the lawsuit.
The court found the amendment futile. It relied on the stated legal rule that § 41712’s prohibition on unfair or deceptive practices does not create a private right of action. Because Firsov could not sue for punitive damages under that statute, the court denied leave to amend.
Disposition
The court granted the Rule 12(b)(5) motion to dismiss, quashed the attempted service, granted the request for additional time to serve, and denied leave to amend. The opinion did not dismiss the action without prejudice at this stage; it stated that such a dismissal would follow if the service deadline is missed without a sufficient explanation.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.