Brockmeyer v. May
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
383 F.3d 798 (2004)
- Written by Sara Adams, JD
Facts
Ronald Brockmeyer owned Eromedia (collectively, Brockmeyer) (plaintiffs). Brockmeyer owned a trademark under which he published adult-entertainment media. Brockmeyer sued Marquis Publications, Ltd. (Marquis) (defendant), a British company, and others in federal district court in New York for trademark infringement and related claims. Brockmeyer made two attempts to serve Marquis. First, Brockmeyer sent the summons and complaint by first-class mail to a post office box in England with a request for a waiver of service. Marquis did not respond. The case was transferred to a federal district court in California. The California court ordered Brockmeyer to show cause for why the case should not be dismissed for lack of prosecution and established a deadline. Four days before the deadline, Brockmeyer again tried to serve process by sending the summons and complaint, this time without the waiver of service, to the same post office box in England. Marquis again failed to respond. The district court entered default and default judgment against Marquis. Marquis moved to set aside the default judgment, arguing in part that international service by mail must be sent as certified or registered mail. The district court denied Marquis’s motion, holding that mail service was not prohibited by the Hague Convention (the convention) and that ordinary first-class mail was sufficient. Marquis appealed the district court’s denial of its motion to set aside the default judgment.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Fletcher, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 790,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,200 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.