Spin Master LTD. v. AGANV
Spin Master LTD. v. AGANV
Trial Court Opinion
USDC SDNY DOCUMENT UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT ELECTRONICALLY FILED SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORE boc #: DATE FILED: 1/27/2022 SPIN MASTER LTD. aad SPIN MASTER TOYS UK LIMITED, Plaintiffs, ~against- AGANY; AINA; BABELEMI STORE; BEARABUL STORE; CAROL MONKEY BABY OFFICIAL STORE; CHAOZHOU CHAOAN DONGDONG PLASTIC TOYS CG, LTD; CHILDHOOD TOY STORE; CROKO TOY STORE; EDUCATIONAL TOY CITY STORE; FASHIONISTAR STORE; FUN ANIMATION TOY STORE; GLOBAL MOCUBE STORE; GO FUN STORE; GUANGZHOU SUSHENG NETWORK TECHNOLOGY CoO., LID; HANGZHOD DINGXIN TECHNOLOGY CO., LTD: HANGZHOU HANGSING TRADE CO,, LTD; HELLOCUBE STORE; HEYUAN BOY] LIGHTING TECHNOLOGY CO.,, LIMITED, JENHEHY INTERNATIONAL TRADE CO, LTD, 1:22-e7-555 (GHW) JIANGYIN: SUNNY TOY CO. LED, JINHUA YIFAN ARTS AND CRAFTS CO., LTD; LEFT ORDER MAGIC OFFICIAL STORE; LVSE LIFE STORE, MUIA TECH STORE; MODERNBABY STORE; MQQ CONTOURING STORE; NANTONG JH PLASTIC PRODUCT CO, LTD: NINGBO HAISHU TONGYANG CRAFTS CO, LID: NINGBO JUNYUAN : INTELLIGENT TECHNOLOGY Co., LTD; NINGBO ROY AL IMPORT AND EXPORT CO, LTD. NINGBO SHINEGIFTS IMPORT & EXPORT CO, LTD; PLAYING WITH YOUR FINGERTIPS STORE, PROFESSIONAL MAGIC-CUBE STORE; PUZZLES STORE; QUANZHOU RIQUAN TRADING CO., LTD; SENLEGOLY FUNNY- TOY STORE; SHANGCHENG COUNTY HAIBAODA TRADING CO., LTD; SHANTOU CHENG HAT XTEDEFENG TOYS FIRM; SHANTOU CITYCHENGHAI DISTRICT NEW ERA TOYS & CRAFTS FIRM; SHANTOU TANGO TECH. CO., LTD: SHANTOU TOMNESS TRADING CO.,LTD; SHANTOU XTAO DAN YOUPIN TOYS CO, LTD;
SHENZHEN DONGFANG RUNTAI TECHNOLOGY CO., LTD; SHENZHEN DSYY COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGY Co., LTD, SHENZHEN NEW WAY TECHNOLOGY CO. LIMITED; SHOP5891750 STORE; SMILING TOY SHENZHEN NEW WAY TECHNOLOGY CO., SMILING TOY STORE; WANDER WORL; WEDOAM STORE; XIN YU TRENDY TOY STORE; YANCHENG LANYI INTERNATIONAL TRADING LTD; YIWU AIGENG TRADE Co,, LTD; YIWU CITY JO TOYS CO, LTD.; YIWU FENGQING TOY CO., LTD; YRWU HOLYMILL COMMODITY Co., LTD, YIWU JIANYU IMP & EXP CO, LTD; YIWU JIXU IMPORT AND EXPORT CO.,, LTD; YIWU JO TOYS CO, CED; YIWU SPECIAL4U COMMODITY FACTORY; YIWU TUOYING TECHNOLOGY CO, LTD.; YIWU TWINS WIN IMPORT & EXPORT CO, LTD, YIWU WUZUN TOYS CO, LTD; YIWU XINTU IMPORT AND EXPORT CO., LTD; YIWU YOUCAN IMP. & EXP. CO, LTD. ZCUBE OFFICIAL STORE, and ZY-WISDOM STORE, Defendants. GREGORY H. WOODS, United States District Judge: The Court has received Plaintiff’s January 20, 2022 request for a temporary restraiming order. In order to evaluate that request, the Court requires more information regarding Plaintitts’ arguments for ordering service by electronic means on the Defendants located in the People’s Republic of China. Plaintiffs’ memorandum of law in support of its application for a temporary restraining order (“Mem.”) argues that the Court should permit service by electconic means under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(f)(2)(A). Tn relevant part, that provision provides that an individual in foreign country can be served “by a method that is reasonably calculated to give notice . .. as prescribed by
the foreign country’s law for service in that country in an action in its courts of general janisdiction.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 4) (@)(A). Plaintiffs assert that Article 87 of the Civil Procedure Law of the People’s Republic of China (“Article 87”) permits service by electronic means. Mem. at 18. According to Plaintiffs, that provision states, “subject to the consent of the person on which a procedural document ts to be served, the document may be served by way of facsimile, electronic email, or any other means through which the receipt of the document may be acknowledged.” Id (emphasis added). Article 87's plain text would appear to require the consent of the person being served prior to email service. Moreover, Article 277 of the Civil Procedure Law of the People’s Republic of China (“Article 277”) states that “no foreign agency or individual may serve documents . . . within the
territory of the People’s Republic of China without the consent of the in-charge authorities of the People’s Republic of China.” Zbizheng Wang x Huil, No. C18-1220RSL,
2020 WL 4734936, at *1 WW. D, Wash. June 22, 2020) (“Article 277 of the Chinese Civil Law, provides that, except when coordinated in conformity with international treaties to which China is a party, ‘no foreign authority or individual is allowed to serve process, conduct investigation, or obtain evidence within the borders of People’s Republic of China without permission” from the country’s Central Authority.”’). That provision would seem to prohibit service by a foreign individual on a nonconsenting party. Plaintiffs have not explained why, in light of the plain language of Article 87, service by electronic means is permitted on a non-consenting party. Nor have they provided any factual support that the Defendants in this case have, in fact, consented. And Plaintiffs do not discuss Article 277 in their application. Accordingly, should Plaintiffs wish to pursue their application for a temporary restraining order, they should submit a brief that explains: (1) how Article 87 permits electronic service on a Honconsenting parties, and (2) why Article 277 does not prohibit electronic
service by a foreign individual. Alternatively, Plaintiffs may submit factual support demonstrating that Defendants have, in this case, consented to service by electronic means. The brief should not discuss means of service under any provisions of Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(f) other than Rule 4()(2){a). The brief is not to exceed five pages in length without prior leave of the court, excluding any facts in support. It should be submitted no later than February 4, 2022.
SO ORDERED. Dated: January 27, 2022 New York, New York atone WOODS United States District Judge
Reference
- Status
- Unknown