Comments on: Case of the Day: Pacific Worldwide v. Ample Bright Development https://lettersblogatory.com/2012/01/04/pacific-worldwide-ample-bright/ The Blog of International Judicial Assistance Fri, 13 Dec 2024 02:10:00 +0000 hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=6.9.4 By: Case of the Day: Hyundai Merchant Marine Co. v. Grand China Shipping (Hong Kong) Co. | Letters Blogatory https://lettersblogatory.com/2012/01/04/pacific-worldwide-ample-bright/#comment-23295 Mon, 02 Dec 2024 03:30:05 +0000 http://lettersblogatory.com/?p=3596#comment-23295 […] why that should lead to dismissal. Second, while China has indeed objected to service by mail, Hong Kong has not. So it’s not clear that the premise of the defendants’ argument is correct with respect […]

]]> By: Service in Hong Kong: McIntire v. China MediaExpress Holdings | Letters Blogatory https://lettersblogatory.com/2012/01/04/pacific-worldwide-ample-bright/#comment-23234 Sun, 01 Dec 2024 04:12:07 +0000 http://lettersblogatory.com/?p=3596#comment-23234 […] Rules of Civil Procedure authorized the service. Interestingly, there was a simpler alternative: Hong Kong has made no reservation under Article 10(a), and therefore, under FRCP 4(f)(2)(C)(ii), the plaintiffs could simply have served the documents by […]

]]> By: Case of the Day: Hyundai Merchant Marine Co. v. Grand China Shipping (Hong Kong) Co. | Letters Blogatory https://lettersblogatory.com/2012/01/04/pacific-worldwide-ample-bright/#comment-366 Thu, 09 Aug 2012 10:00:38 +0000 http://lettersblogatory.com/?p=3596#comment-366 […] why that should lead to dismissal. Second, while China has indeed objected to service by mail, Hong Kong has not. So it’s not clear that the premise of the defendants’ argument is correct with respect […]

]]>