Micron Tech., Inc. v. United Microelectronics Corp.
United States District Court for the Northern District of California
November 20, 2018, Decided; November 20, 2018, Filed
Case No. 17-cv-06932-MMC
ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO SERVE DEFENDANT JINHUA BY ALTERNATIVE MEANS; DEFERRING RULING ON DEFENDANT JINHUA'S MOTION TO DISMISS; VACATING HEARING
Re: Dkt. No. 117
Before the Court are two motions: (1) defendant Fujian Jinhua Integrated Circuit Co., Ltd.'s ("Jinhua") "Motion to Dismiss for Insufficient Service of Process and for Lack of Personal Jurisdiction," filed October 2, 2018; and (2) plaintiff Micron Technology, Inc.'s ("Micron") "Motion to Serve Defendant Fujian Jinhua Integrated Circuit Co., Ltd. by Alternative Means Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(f)(3)," filed October 16, 2018. Both motions have been fully briefed. Having read and considered the parties' respective written submissions, the Court finds the matters suitable for determination thereon, VACATES the hearing scheduled for November 30, 2018, and hereby rules as follows.
Jinhua is a "limited liability corporation founded in Mainland China." (See Zheng Decl. ¶ 3.) Under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, a foreign corporation may be served [*3] at "a place not within any judicial district of the United States" in the same manner as that by which an individual may be so served, see Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(h)(2), including the following: (1) by any means "authorized by the Hague Convention on the Service Abroad of Judicial and Extrajudicial Documents" ("Hague Convention"), see Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(f)(1); (2) by, "unless prohibited by the foreign country's law, . . . using any form of mail that the clerk addresses and sends to the [corporation] and that requires a signed receipt," see Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(f)(2)(C); and (3) "by other means not prohibited by international agreement, as the court orders," see Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(f)(3).
In the instant case, Micron first attempted to serve Jinhua in China by the means set forth in Rule 4(f)(1), i.e., by following a procedure authorized by the Hague Convention, but was unsuccessful in accomplishing service in such manner. (See Quintanilla Decl. ¶¶ 2-3.) Thereafter, Micron sought to effectuate service under Rule 4(f)(2)(C), specifically, by causing the Clerk of Court to mail a copy of the summons and complaint to Stephen Chen at two addresses in Taiwan (see Doc. Nos. 89, 90), a manner of service challenged by Jinhua in its motion to dismiss. By the instant motion, Micron now asks the Court to defer ruling [*4] on Jinhua's motion and seeks, pursuant to Rule 4(f)(3), leave of court to serve Jinhua by other means, specifically, by service of the summons and complaint on Jinhua by email sent to Jinhua's "United States counsel of record, Dan Johnson and/or Lyle B. Vander Schaaf" (see Pl.'s Mot. at 1:11-12), or, alternatively, to Jinhua's email address, specifically, email@example.com.Read The Full CaseNot a Lexis Advance subscriber? Try it out for free.
Full case includes Shepard's, Headnotes, Legal Analytics from Lex Machina, and more.
2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 198125 *; 2018 WL 6069646
MICRON TECHNOLOGY, INC., Plaintiff, v. UNITED MICROELECTRONICS CORPORATION, et al., Defendants.
Subsequent History: Dismissed by, Request granted Micron Tech., Inc. v. United Microelectronics Corp., 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 9408 (N.D. Cal., Jan. 18, 2019)
Dismissed by, in part, Motion denied by, Objection sustained by Micron Tech., Inc. v. United Microelectronics Corp., 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 74527 (N.D. Cal., May 2, 2019)
Stay granted by, Motion dismissed by, Without prejudice Micron Tech., Inc. v. United Microelectronics Corp., 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 115650 (N.D. Cal., July 11, 2019)
documents, summons, email, alternative means, motion to dismiss