-
Case of the Day: WSOU Investments v. TP-Link Technologies
The case of the day is WSOU Investments LLC v. TP-Link Technologies Co. (W.D. Tex. 2021). WSOU sued TP-Link, a Chinese company whose offices are in Shenzhen, for patent infringement. It sought leave under FRCP 4(f)(3) to serve process by email to TP-Link’s former US counsel and by certified mail to TP-Link’s US subsidiary. The……
-
Case of the Day: DRM Contract Administration v. Proton Technologies
The case of the day is DRM Contract Administration Ltd. v. Proton Technologies AG [2021] IEHC 554. DRM sued Proton Technologies, the Swiss company that runs the well-known Protonmail email service, for defamation after two emails were sent using Protonmail by a pseudonymous user, “ConcernedTaxPayer11,” asserting that DRM’s managing director “had engaged in fraudulent activities……
-
Case of the Day: Love-Less Ash Co. v. Asia Pacific Construction
The case of the day is Love-Less Ash Co. v. Asia Pacific Construction, LLC (D. Utah 2021). Love-Less brought a claim against Ka Yee Wong and others. The opinion doesn’t discuss the substance of the claim. Love-Less sought leave to serve the defendant by email. He was believed to be in mainland China or in……
-
Minyao Wang on Service By Email
I welcome readers back to Letters Blogatory with this guest post by friend of Letters Blogatory Minyao Wang. Minyao takes a look at the Grupo Cementos case, which the Supreme Court has decided not to review. His take on Rule 4(f)(3) is not in accord with mine, and I will address the disagreement in the……
-
Case of the Day: Genus Lifesciences v. Tapaysa Engineering
The case of the day is Genus Lifesciences Inc. v. Tapaysa Eng’g Works Pvt. Ltd. (E.D. Pa. 2021). Genus brought a commercial claim against Tapaysa, an Indian company. It sought to serve process via the Indian central authority but was unsuccessful. Or perhaps it would be better to say that it has been unsuccessful thus far: it……