Automated Summary
Key Facts
Plaintiff Global Equipment Company Inc. filed a complaint for trademark infringement against Defendant Global Storage Equipment Manufacturer Limited and related entities. The court granted Global Equipment's motion for alternative service, authorizing email service to Chinese and Canadian defendants under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(f)(3). The court also re-noted the preliminary injunction motion for August 15, 2025, to provide defendants adequate time to respond.
Issues
Whether the Court should grant Plaintiff Global Equipment's motion for alternative service via email to foreign defendants (Chinese and Canadian entities) in a trademark infringement case, given that Rule 4(f)(3) permits service by other means not prohibited by international agreement as the court orders, and the three requirements are satisfied: no international agreement prohibits email service, email service comports with due process as defendants use email in business operations, and email service expedites resolution of the preliminary injunction motion.
Holdings
The Court grants Plaintiff Global Equipment's request for alternative service of the summons, complaint, and preliminary injunction motion via email to the three defendants (GSE, Certified Warehouse Equipment Inc., and All Lift Warehouse Solutions Inc.) under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(f)(3). The Court also re-notes the preliminary injunction motion for August 15, 2025, to account for Defendants' delayed notice and provide them full opportunity to respond.
Remedies
- The Court grants Plaintiff Global Equipment's request to serve the summons, complaint, and preliminary injunction motion on Defendants via email to their verified email addresses associated with their selling accounts.
- The Clerk is directed to re-note the motion for preliminary injunction for August 15, 2025 to account for Defendants' delayed notice and provide them with full opportunity to respond.
Legal Principles
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(h)(2) governs service of process on foreign corporations, allowing service in any manner prescribed by Rule 4(f) for serving an individual in a foreign country. Rule 4(f)(3) permits service by other means not prohibited by international agreement as the court orders. The Ninth Circuit requires three requirements for Rule 4(f)(3) service: it must not be prohibited by international agreement, must comport with constitutional notions of due process, and the facts and circumstances must necessitate the district court's intervention. Rule 65(a)(1) requires that a preliminary injunction be issued only with notice to the adverse party.
Precedent Name
- Rio Props., Inc. v. Rio Int'l Interlink
- Amazon.com, Inc. v. Dafang HaoJiafu Hotpot Store
- FitTrack Inc. v. Hyperzoo Tech. Ltd.
Cited Statute
Federal Rules of Civil Procedure
Judge Name
Judge Kymberly K. Evanson presiding over the case
Passage Text
- Accordingly, the Court GRANTS Global Equipment's request to allow alternative service (Dkt. No. 8), authorizing it to serve a copy of the summons and complaint, as well as the motion for preliminary injunction and the associated declaration, on Defendants via email to the verified email addresses associated with their selling accounts as follows: (1) Defendant GSE at sales@global-racking.com (2) Defendant Certified Warehouse Equipment Inc. at mario@cwe.ltd (3) Defendant All Lift Warehouse Solutions Inc. at info@alllift.ca
- Global Equipment shall file proof of service no later than July 18, 2025. The proof of service shall indicate whether a bounce-back notification of undeliverability was received.
- Here, the three requirements for Rule 4(f)(3) service are satisfied. First, there is no international agreement prohibiting service via email to Chinese or Canadian entities. Second, service by email would comport with due process because it appears that Defendants use email in their business operations, and thus Global Equipment's emails would be reasonably calculated to notify Defendants of this action and the pending motion.