1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 SAN JOSE DIVISION 7 8 FLATSIX, LLC, Case No. 23-cv-02289-VKD

9 Plaintiff, ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF'S 10 v. MOTION FOR ALTERNATIVE SERVICE; SETTING CASE 11 BLERIM SYLEJMANI, MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE 12 Defendant. Re: Dkt. No. 12

13 14 Plaintiff Flatsix, LLC (“Flatsix”) moves for an order granting it permission to serve 15 defendant Blerim Sylejmani by email pursuant to Rule 4(f)(3) of the Federal Rules of Civil 16 Procedure. Dkt. No. 12. The Court previously found the matter suitable for determination without 17 oral argument. Dkt. No. 13; Civil L.R. 7-1(b). For the reasons discussed below, the Court grants 18 Flatsix’s motion for permission to serve Mr. Sylejmani by email. 19 According to the complaint, Flatsix is a Delaware corporation with its principal place of 20 business in Wisconsin. Dkt. No. 1 ¶ 1. Mr. Sylejmani is an individual who claims to reside in 21 Albania. Id. ¶ 2; Dkt. No. 12-1, Exs. B, C. Flatsix alleges that Mr. Sylejmani copied original 22 videos from Flatsix’s website, www.carecarekisok.com, and uploaded them to Mr. Sylejmani’s 23 YouTube channel without permission. Dkt. No. 1 ¶¶ 8-12. After Flatsix asked YouTube to 24 remove the videos due to copyright infringement, Mr. Sylejmani submitted a response claiming 25 that he owned the rights to the videos. Id. ¶ 14. The response included Mr. Sylejmani’s full name, 26 a physical address in Tirana, Albania, and the email address [email protected]. Dkt. No. 12-1, 27 Ex. C. Mr. Sylejmani also sent an email to Flatsix’s founder from this same email address on 1 On May 11, 2023, Flatsix filed this action asserting claims of copyright infringement, 2 breach of contract, and unfair competition against Mr. Sylejmani. Dkt. No. 1. Flatsix reports that 3 it has been unable to serve Mr. Sylejmani at the physical address he provided because that address 4 appears to be fake. Dkt. No. 12-1 ¶ 6. Flatsix now requests permission to serve Mr. Sylejmani by 5 email. See Dkt. No. 12. 6 “Rule 4(f)(3) permits service in a place not within any judicial district of the United States 7 by means not prohibited by international agreement as may be directed by the court.” Rio 8 Properties, Inc. v. Rio Int'l Interlink,

(9th Cir. 2002) (quoting Fed. R. Civ. P. 9 4(f)(3)) (cleaned up). The rule does not “create a hierarchy of preferred methods of service of 10 process,” and “service of process under Rule 4(f)(3) is neither a last resort nor extraordinary 11 relief.”

(cleaned up). Rule 4(f)(3) requires only that service be (1) directed by the 12 court and (2) not prohibited by international agreement.

. So long as service is “court- 13 directed and not prohibited by an international agreement, service of process ordered under Rule 14 4(f)(3) may be accomplished in contravention of the laws of the foreign country.”

. 15 Any alternate means of service must comport with due process, and thus “must be reasonably 16 calculated, under all the circumstances, to apprise interested parties of the pendency of the action 17 and afford them an opportunity to present their objections.”

(cleaned up). The 18 determination whether the circumstances in a particular case require alternate service of process 19 under Rule 4(f)(3) is a matter within the Court’s discretion.

20 Albania is a party to the Hague Convention on the Service Abroad of Judicial and 21 Extrajudicial Documents. See Status Table, Convention of 15 November 1965 on the Service 22 Abroad of Judicial and Extrajudicial Documents in Civil or Commercial Matters, Hague 23 Conference on Private International Law, https://www.hcch.net/en/instruments/conventions/status- 24 table/?cid=17. Albania has not objected to any portions of the Convention, including Article 10, 25 which allows service through “postal channels” and “directly through the judicial officers, official 26 or other competent persons of the State of destination.” Id.; Hague Service Convention, art. 10, 27 Nov. 15, 1965, 20 U.S.T. 361, T.I.A.S. 6638. The Court finds persuasive the several decisions in 1 not violate the Hague Convention. See, e.g., Zoho Corp. v. Target Integration, Inc., No. 23-cv- 2 00054-SI,

, at *3 (N.D. Cal. Apr. 7, 2023); Wang v. Ehang Holdings Ltd., No. 3 20-cv-00569-BLF,

, at *3 (N.D. Cal. June 29, 2020); WeWork Cos., Inc. v. 4 WePlus (Shanghai) Tech. Co., Ltd., No. 18-cv-04543-EJD,

, at *2 (N.D. Cal. 5 Jan. 10, 2019); Richmond Techs., Inc. v. Aumtech Bus. Sols., No. 11-cv-02460-LHK,

2607158, at *12 (N.D. Cal. July 1, 2011). 7 Flatsix has demonstrated that that alternate service via email directed to Mr. Sylejmani at 8 the [email protected] email address is reasonably calculated to apprise Mr. Sylejmani of the 9 pendency of this action. Mr. Sylejmani apparently contacted Flatsix about the conduct at issue in 10 this litigation using this email address as recently as April of 2023. Dkt. No 12-1 ¶¶ 4-5. Given 11 that the physical address Mr. Sylejmani provided appears to be fake, service by email is “the 12 method of service most likely to reach [him].” Rio Properties, Inc.,

. See also

13 at 1018 (“If any method of communication is reasonably calculated to provide RII with notice, 14 surely it is email—the method of communication which RII utilizes and prefers.”). 15 For these reasons, the Court grants Flatsix’s motion for permission to serve Mr. Sylejmani 16 by email at [email protected]. Flatsix correctly notes that the 90-day time limit for service in 17 Rule 4(m) does not apply to service of an individual in a foreign country. Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(m); 18 Ho v. Pinsukanjana, No. 17-cv-06520-PJH,

, at *4 (N.D. Cal. June 7, 2019). 19 Flatsix represents that if its motion is granted, “service will be effectuated immediately by email.” 20 Dkt. No. 12 at 5. The Court therefore directs Flatsix to file proof of service no later than 21 September 7, 2023. 22 The Court resets the initial case management conference for November 7, 2023 at 1:30 23 p.m. by Zoom videoconference. The parties shall file their joint case management statement by 24 October 31, 2023. 25 // 26 // 27 // 1 IT IS SO ORDERED. 2 Dated: August 31, 2023 3

4 VIRGINIA K. DEMARCHI 5 United States Magistrate Judge 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

13

© 15 16

= 17

Z 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28