Miller v. Foucher

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• noting that service by email on a Chinese defendant does not violate the Hague Convention even though China had objected to service by postal channels under Article 10 of the Hague Convention
• ordering email service where the defendant has an online business and regularly communicates with customers via email
• service by email on 2 defendants that plaintiff learned were based out of China and Malaysia but whose location 3 could not otherwise be determined
• same, noting, “Here, defendants have operated in such a way as to stymie any effort to determine their true addresses.”
• “Service through email is particularly appropriate here because . . . defendants 24 engage in online business and regularly communicate with customers through functional email 25 addresses”
• “Service through email is particularly appropriate here because, as the record reflects . . . the defendants engage in online business and regularly communicate with customers through functional email addresses . . .”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).