A group of outstanding scholars filed an amicus brief in support of my petition for cert. in Changzhou SinoType v. Rockefeller Technology. The group includes (in alphabetical order) George Bermann (Columbia), Hannah Buxbaum (Indiana), John Coyle (UNC), Robin Effron (Brooklyn), Maggie Gardner (Cornell), David Stewart (Georgetown), and Louise Ellen Teitz (Roger Williams). Andrew Hessick, Richard Simpson, Joseph Gross, and Jared Hubbard were counsel to the amici.

I really like the brief. The obvious reason is that it picks up on a lot of the themes and arguments in the petition. But it adds some points that I agree with and that, for one reason or another, I didn’t argue. In particular, they make it clear that the Convention applies to all judicial documents and even extrajudicial documents, not just to summonses. I have made that point many times here at Letters Blogatory, but I did not focus on it in the petition, because dicta in both Schlunk and Water Splash suggest that the scope of the Convention is limited to formal service of process, and it didn’t seem critical to take on that battle.

There may be a few additional shoes to drop in the next couple of days, and if so, you can read about them here. The Court is scheduled to discuss the case at its September 29 conference. Rockefeller, as is common, waived its response, so our hope is that the justices call for a response and perhaps also the views of the Solicitor General.