-
Case of the Day: FKA Distributing v. Yisi Technology
The case of the day is FKA Distributing Co. v. Yisi Technology Co. (E.D. Mich. 2017). FKA sued Yisi, a Chinese firm. FKA first simply emailed the summons to Yisi, but after Yisi failed to respond, it made a request for service under the Hague Service Convention. Although only a few months had passed, FKA……
-
Case of the Day: In re Richmond Group
The case of the day is Lustig v. Wilson (In re Richmond Group) (Bankr. W.D.N.Y. 2017). Lustig, the bankruptcy trustee of the Richmond Group, sued Wilson, who resided in New Zealand. Lustig sought leave under FRCP 4(f)(3) to serve process on Wilson by email. New Zealand is not a party to the Hague Service Convention,……
-
Case of the Day: Marks Law Offices v. Mireskandari
The case of the day is Marks Law Offices LLC v. Mireskandari (3d Cir. 2017). The defendants, Shahrokh Mireskandari and Paul Baxendale-Walker, had hired Bruce Marks to represent them in a RICO case. Based on a decision from California, it seems that Mireskandari and Baxendale-Walker were two English solicitors who had been “struck off,” as……
-
Case of the Day: Amirit Technologies v. HTN Wireless
The case of the day is Amirit Technologies, Inc. v. HTN Wireless, Inc. (D.N.J. 2017). Amirit, a New Jersey telecommunications firm, sued HTN and one of Amirit’s former employees, Syed Muneeb Arshad. Amirit sought to serve process on Arshad in Connecticut unsuccessfully. HTN’s counsel told Amirit that Arshad was living in Pakistan. His address, though,……
-
Case of the Day: SEC v. Dubovoy
The case of the day is Securities & Exchange Commission v. Dubovoy (D.N.J. 2016). The SEC sued Nikolai Slepenkov and Maxim Zakharchenko, both Russian nationals, alleging violations of § 17(a) of the Securities Act of 1933 and §§ 10(b), 20(b), and 20(e) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. The claim was that Ukrainian hackers……