Amazon.com Inc v. Dafang HaoJiafu Hotpot Store

Opinion

4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE 6

7 AMAZON.COM, INC., a Delaware Case No. 2-21-cv-00766 -RSM 8 corporation; HANESBRANDS, INC., a Maryland corporation; and HBI BRANDED Consolidated Cases: 9 APPAREL ENTERPRISES, LLC, a 2:21-cv-00766 2:21-cv-00767 Delaware limited liability company, 10 2:21-cv-00768 2:21-cv-00769 11 Plaintiffs, 2:21-cv-00770 2:21-cv-00771 12 v. 2:21-cv-00772 13 2:21-cv-00773 YANG XUEZHAO, an individual; 2:21-cv-00774 2:21-cv-00775 14 SHAOBAI ZHANG, an individual; SHEN 2:21-cv-00776 15 L CI HJU ENA ,N a, n a in n i dn id vi iv di ud au l;a l L; IY NO ZN HG ISZ HE AN NG G , an 2 2: :2 21 1- -c cv v- -0 00 07 77 77 8 16 individual; HUANG SHUHUA, an individual; CHEN JINAI, an individual; FU ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFFS’ EX 17 YONGBIN, an individual; ZHANG PARTE SUPPLEMENTAL MOTION FOR PENGJU, an individual; XIAOJUAN ZHU, ALTERNATIVE SERVICE 18 an individual; YIMEI LI, an individual; and 19 DOES 1-10,

20 Defendants. 21 I. INTRODUCTION 22 This matter comes before the Court on Plaintiff Amazon.com, Inc. (“Amazon”), 23 24 HanesBrands, Inc., and HBI Branded Apparel Enterprises, LLC (collectively, “HanesBrands”)’s 25 Motion for Alternative Service to effect service on Defendants by email. Dkt. #39. Defendants 26 have not yet appeared in the matter. For the reasons set forth below, the Court GRANTS 27 Plaintiffs’ Motion. 28 II. BACKGROUND 1 2 On June 10, 2021, Plaintiffs filed this action against Dafang HaoJiafu Hotpot Store and 3 DOES 1-10 alleging Lanham Act violations for trademark infringement, false designation of 4 origin, and false advertising, and violations of the Washington Consumer Protection Act related 5 to Defendants’ unlawful sale of silicone covers in the Amazon store for earbud cases bearing 6 HanesBrands’ federally registered Champion-brand trademarks (the “Champion Trademarks”) 7 8 without authorization. Dkt. #1. On July 12, 2021, the Court consolidated this case with twelve 9 other cases alleging the same claims against Defendants for using the Amazon store to unlawfully 10 advertise, market, and sell the silicon earbud covers bearing the Champion Trademarks. See Dkt. 11 #10. On October 20, 2023, Plaintiffs filed a second amended complaint including Defendants 12 13 Yang Xuezhao, Shaobai Zhang, Yongzeng Chen, Lin Zhishang, Huang Shuhua, Chen Jinai, Fu 14 Yongbin, Zhang Pengju, Xiaojuan Zhu, and Yimei Li. Dkt. #36. The Court previously granted 15 Plaintiffs’ initial Motion for Alternative Service, finding that Plaintiffs demonstrated good cause 16 for email service. Dkt. #15. 17 Following initial service, Plaintiffs made further efforts to identify and locate the 18 19 individuals responsible for the counterfeiting activities of the selling accounts. Dkt. #39 at 4. 20 Plaintiffs believe that all of the Defendants are located abroad given that the majority provided 21 business addresses located in China, while the remaining used foreign-based IP addresses, credit 22 card accounts issued from Hong Kong, and selected Chinese as the preferred language for their 23 selling account. Id. at 4-6. Plaintiffs state that Defendants received proceeds from the selling 24 25 accounts that Plaintiffs previously investigated, of which the IP addresses the accounts were 26 accessed from were located in China, as well as falsified or unrelated addresses. Id. The primary 27 means of communicating between Amazon and the individual(s) operating Defendants’ Amazon 28 selling accounts were through verified email addresses that Defendants provided when 1 2 registering their Amazon selling accounts. Id. Plaintiffs state that they confirmed the email 3 accounts are active. Id. at 7. 4 III. DISCUSSION 5 A. Legal Standard 6 Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(f) provides for service of an individual in a foreign 7 8 country “by any internationally agreed means of service that is reasonably calculated to give 9 notice, such as those authorized by the Hague Convention . . .” or “by any other means not 10 prohibited by international agreement, as the court orders.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(f)(1), (3). Courts 11 have permitted service by email where it is the only method reasonably calculated to apprise a 12 13 defendant of the pendency of the action. See, e.g., Rio Properties, Inc. v. Rio Intern. Interlink, 14 284 F.3d 1007, 1016–18 (9th Cir. 2002); Xcentric Ventures, LLC v. Karsen, Ltd., 2011 316966 15 (D. Ariz. 2011). 16 China and Hong Kong1 are signatories to the Hague Convention, and although the Hague 17 Convention is silent regarding service by email, courts in this district regularly authorize requests 18 19 for service by email on foreign defendants in countries that are parties to the Convention. See, 20 e.g., Amazon.com Inc. v. Sirowl Tech., No. 220CV01217RSLJRC, 2020 WL 7122846, at *3 21 (W.D. Wash. Dec. 4, 2020); Will Co. v. Kam Keung Fung, No. 3:20-CV-05666-RSL, 2020 WL 22 6709712, at *2 (W.D. Wash. Nov. 16, 2020). Here, as in Sirowl and Will Co., Plaintiffs have 23 demonstrated an inability to obtain valid physical addresses for Defendants. Furthermore, 24 25 Plaintiffs have shown that Defendants conduct business through the Internet such that “service 26 27 1 Hong Kong is a “special administrative region of the People’s Republic of China, which has advised the United 28 States that the Hague Service Convention is in effect in Hong Kong.” Facebook, Inc. v. Banana Ads, LLC, No. C- 11-3619 YGR, 2012 WL 1038752, at *2 (N.D. Cal. Mar. 27, 2012). by email will provide defendants with sufficient notice and an opportunity to respond.” Sirowl 1 2 Tech., 2020 WL 7122846, at *3. Accordingly, the Court finds that service by email is appropriate. 3 Plaintiffs’ Motion for Alternative Service on the named Defendants is therefore granted. 4 IV. CONCLUSION 5 Plaintiffs’ ex parte Supplemental Motion for Alternative Service, Dkt. #39, is 6 GRANTED. Plaintiffs are authorized to serve the following Defendants via registered the email 7 8 addresses listed below and should provide confirmation of completed service by email to the 9 Court: 10 a. Defendant Yang Xuezhao: yifansi2020_us@163.com; 11 b. Defendant Shaobai Zhang: asd53425@163.com; 12 13 c. Defendant Shen Lijuan: chenjjyu123@outlook.com; 14 d. Defendant Yongzeng Chen: m18175611110@163.com; 15 e. Defendant Lin Zhishang: tisha569mmm@gmail.com; 16 f. Defendant Huang Shuhua: parentpnweducation@outlook.com and 17 fathergaji12@gmail.com; 18 g. Defendant Chen Jinai: dearfwsf@outlook.com; 19 h. Defendant Fu Yongbin: caiqicn@outlook.com; 20 i. Defendant Zhang Pengju: changshouhua753@sina.com and 21 paminahair@163.com; 22 j. Defendant Yimei Li: haojiafu@hotmail.com. 23

24 DATED this 23rd day of January, 2024. 25 A 26 27 RICARDO S. MARTINEZ UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 28