ASSOCIATED ENERGY GROUP, LLC
v.
UKRAINE INTERNATIONAL AIRLINES PJSC
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The court granted the plaintiff's motion to authorize alternative service of process via email.
Plaintiff sued for breach of contract, but attempts to serve the foreign defendant via the Hague Convention failed due to the Russia-Ukraine conflict.…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Reasonably Calculated To Give Notice cases and more on FLexlaw
A court acting under Rule 4(f)(3), therefore, remains free to order alternative means of service where a signatory nation has not expressly objected to those means. See Gurung v. Malhotra, 279 F.R.D. 215, 219 (S.D.N.Y. 2011). Accordingly, service by e-mail, social media messaging, and publication on a designated website do not violate international agreements. See Stat Med. Devices, Inc. v. HTL-Strefa, Inc., No. 15-20590-CIV, 2015 WL 5320947, at *3 (S.D. Fla. Sept. 14, 2015) (“This Court and many other federal courts have permitted service by electronic mail and determined that an objection to Article 10 of the
Hague Convention, i.e. an objection to service through “postal channels” does not equate to an express objection to service via electronic mail.”). Additionally, e-mail, social media messaging, return-receipt mail, and designated website posting are reasonably calculated to give notice to Defendant. Here, Plaintiff has provided good cause and sufficient evidence to indicate that alternative service through e-mail is “reasonably calculated, under all the circumstances, to apprise the interested parties of the pendency of the action.” Mullane v. Cent. Hanover Bank & Trust Co., 339 U.S. 306, 314 (1950). By way of example, Plaintiff has identified and located the emails for Defendant's Head of Legal Department and attorneys of record from a case originating in the United States District Court for the Southern District of California. Accordingly, the Court grants Plaintiff's Motion [ECF No. 12] and authorizes alternate service of process on Defendant via email to Liudmyla Riaboshapka, Head of Defendant's Legal Department at [email protected], and carbon-copying Benedict Idemundia, Defendant's known legal counsel, at [email protected]. Plaintiff's e-mails shall effect service of the Summons, Complaint, and all future filings and discovery in this matter together with their respective translations. Once completed, Plaintiff shall file a copy of delivery confirmation (or substantially equivalent document) as proof that service has been carried out upon Defendant as required by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(1)(2)(B). DONE AND ORDERED in Chambers, in Miami, Florida, on November 15, 2023.
Jgnathan Goodman
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Copies Furnished to: The Honorable Robert N. Scola, Jr. All Counsel of Record