Global Export Marketing Co., Ltd. v. Abdelrahman A. Abbar Trading Company
- John Cronan
- 1:20-cv-03504
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 4
In Global Export Marketing v. Abdelrahman A. Abbar Trading, Judge Cronan granted permission to serve a report by email.
Global Export Marketing Co., Ltd. may serve Abdelrahman A. Abbar Trading Company with the Report and Recommendation by email to three identified representatives; the defendant must receive notice through that court-authorized method.
What happened
Global Export Marketing Co., Ltd. asked to serve Abdelrahman A. Abbar Trading Company with a copy of a magistrate judge’s report and recommendation by alternative means. Earlier mailing and personal-service attempts had failed, and one package was lost or refused.
The court found that court intervention was needed because Saudi Arabia is not a party to the Hague Convention and the defendant appeared to be avoiding service. It also found that email service through three representatives would likely notify the defendant because the representatives’ addresses had been used for business communications.
Judge John P. Cronan granted Global Export Marketing’s motion and ordered service by email, with proof of service to be filed by March 7, 2023. The Clerk was directed to close the motion docket entry.
The detailed version
- Global Export Marketing Co., Ltd. v. Abdelrahman A. Abbar Trading Company · No. 1:20-cv-03504
- John Cronan
- Mar. 6, 2023
Background
Global Export Marketing moved for permission to serve Abdelrahman A. Abbar Trading Company with a copy of Judge Sarah Netburn’s Report and Recommendation through alternative means. The court explained that federal law generally requires mailing a copy of the report and that service by mail is complete when the document is mailed.
Global Export Marketing had caused a copy to be sent by Federal Express on January 27, 2023, but the package was lost. A later shipment, sent on February 15, was refused by the recipient. Local counsel in Saudi Arabia also made two attempts to serve the report personally; on both occasions, the defendant’s representative refused service and directed counsel elsewhere, including once to an invalid address. Global Export Marketing had also emailed a copy to a representative on January 27.
Court’s Analysis
The court applied Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(f)(3), which allows a court to order service on a party outside the United States by means not prohibited by an international agreement. It found that court intervention was necessary because Saudi Arabia is not a party to the Hague Convention and because the defendant appeared to be intentionally evading service.
The court also found that email service would satisfy due process, meaning it would be reasonably calculated to notify the defendant. Counsel identified email addresses for three of the defendant’s representatives. Global Export Marketing’s president stated that he regularly communicated with those representatives at those addresses for business purposes, and an earlier email had not been returned as undeliverable.
Ruling
Judge John P. Cronan granted Global Export Marketing’s motion to serve the defendant with the Report and Recommendation by alternative means. The court ordered Global Export Marketing to promptly email the report to the defendant’s three representatives at the addresses identified in its supporting declaration and to file proof of service by March 7, 2023. The Clerk of Court was directed to close Docket Number 65.
Read the full 4-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.