Amazon.com Inc v. Abdyrakhmanova

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 6 WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE AMAZON.COM INC, et al., CASE NO. C23-1646-KKE Plaintiff(s), ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFFS’ EX v. PARTE MOTION FOR ALTERNATIVE SERVICE ZHUMABUBU ABDYRAKHMANOVA, et al., Defendant(s).

This matter comes before the Court on an ex parte motion filed by Plaintiffs Amazon.com Inc., Amazon.com Services LLC, and the Procter & Gamble Company requesting leave to complete service of process by email on Defendants. Dkt. No. 11. For the following reasons, the Court grants the motion.

Plaintiffs filed this action in October 2023, alleging claims for trademark infringement, false designation of origin, and false advertising under the Lanham Act; violations of the Washington Consumer Protection Act; and breach of contract. Dkt. No. 1. Plaintiffs’ claims are based on allegations that Defendants sold counterfeit Procter and Gamble products through 14 Amazon selling accounts. See id.; Dkt. No. 13 ¶ 4. In creating those selling accounts, Defendants registered email addresses with Amazon and those email addresses are the primary means of communication from Amazon to Defendants. Dkt. No. 13 ¶ 5.

1 Plaintiffs’ investigation of the selling accounts associated with Defendants suggests that Defendants reside in Austria, Kyrgyzstan, the Republic of Georgia, Turkey, and Ukraine. Dkt.

3 No. 12 ¶¶ 2–5. Plaintiff’s investigation further suggests that Defendants provided misleading or fraudulent documents when registering their selling accounts, which has made it impossible for Plaintiffs to confirm physical addresses for Defendants, although they have been able to confirm functional email accounts for them. Id. ¶¶ 2–8. Plaintiffs therefore request leave from the Court to complete service of process by email under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(f)(3). Dkt. No. 11.

9 A person located outside the United States may be served by “means not prohibited by international agreement, as the court orders.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(f)(3). The Court is aware of no international agreement prohibiting service by email on defendants residing in Austria, Kyrgyzstan, the Republic of Georgia, Turkey, and Ukraine. To the contrary, the Hague Convention on the Service Abroad of Judicial and Extrajudicial Documents does not prohibit service by email on defendants residing in signatory countries, which include Austria, the Republic of Georgia, Turkey, and Ukraine. See Contracting Parties, Hague Conference on Private International Law, available at https://www.hcch.net/en/instruments/conventions/status- table/?cid=17 (last visited Jan. 10, 2024). Although Kyrgyzstan is not a signatory to the Hague Convention, courts have authorized service by email on defendants residing there. See, e.g., Kyjen Co., LLC v. Individuals, Corps., Ltd. Liab. Cos., P’ships & Unincorporated Ass’ns Identified on Schedule AR to the Complaint, 23 Civ. 612 (JHR), 2023 WL 2330429 (S.D.N.Y. Mar. 2, 2023); Chanel, Inc. v. Individuals, P’ships & Unincorporated Ass’ns Identified on Schedule “A”, Case No. 20-60519-CIV-SMITH, 2020 WL 3272325 (S.D. Fla. Apr. 9, 2020).

23 Because Plaintiffs have demonstrated an inability to confirm physical addresses for Defendants but appear to have functional email addresses for them, and because Defendants have made email their preferred form of contact with Plaintiffs, the Court exercises its discretion to authorize service by email because it is reasonably calculated to provide Defendants with actual notice. Plaintiffs’ ex parte motion (Dkt. No. 11) is therefore GRANTED. Plaintiffs may serve Defendants by email as described in their motion (Dkt. No. 11 at 7–8) and shall provide the Court with confirmation of completed service by email.

6 Dated this 10th day of January, 2024.

A Kymberly K. Evanson 9 United States District Judge