Wednesday, July 5, 2017

Case of the Day: Juicero, Inc. v. iTaste Co., 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 86033 (N.D. Cal. June 5, 2017)


Plaintiff sued a Chinese manufacturer who allegedly copied the design of its juice maker. Although the defendant retained a U.S. attorney to correspond with the plaintiff, the attorney was not authorized to accept service on behalf of the defendant. The plaintiff moved to effect service under alternative means.

The court granted the motion, allowing service of process through a number of means including service upon the defendant's U.S. attorney, service through the defendant's Facebook account and email. 


Is it too soon to make jokes about the expensive juice machine that does the same thing as your own hands? Of all things to (allegedly) copy!

At any rate, serving a Chinese company always has been a headache. This is an instance of the U.S. court showing a great deal of flexibility to effectuate service of process.

No comments:

Post a Comment