IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

MARSHALL DIVISION

WILLOW INNOVATIONS, INC.,

Plaintiff,

v.

CHIARO TECHNOLOGY, LTD,

Defendant.

Case No. 2:23-cv-00229

JURY TRIAL DEMANDED

WILLOW’S MOTION FOR SERVICE OF PROCESS BY MAIL

Plaintiff Willow Innovations, Inc. (“Willow”) requests the assistance of the Clerk of Court

in serving Defendant Chiaro Technology, Ltd. (“Defendant”), an entity based in the United 

Kingdom (“UK”). Service by mail is appropriate because it is (1) expressly permitted under the 

Federal Rules, (2) not prohibited by international agreement, and (3) reasonably calculated to give

notice to Defendant of this lawsuit. In addition, because Defendant does not maintain an agent for 

service in the U.S., service by mail is the most efficient means of accomplishing service. 

Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(h)(2), a foreign corporation, partnership, or other 

unincorporated association located outside the United States must be served “in any manner 

prescribed by Rule 4(f) for serving an individual, except personal delivery under (f)(2)(C)(i).” 

Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(h)(2). Rule 4(f), in turn, states that an individual in a foreign country may be 

served:

(1) by any internationally agreed means of service that is reasonably calculated to give 

Case 2:23-cv-00229-JRG Document 10 Filed 05/25/23 Page 1 of 4 PageID #: 568
2

notice, such as those authorized by the Hague Convention on the Service Abroad of Judicial 

and Extrajudicial Documents; 

(2) if there is no internationally agreed means, or if an international agreement allows but 

does not specify other means, by a method that is reasonably calculated to give notice: 

(A) as prescribed by the foreign country's law for service in that country in an action 

in its courts of general jurisdiction; 

(B) as the foreign authority directs in response to a letter rogatory or letter of 

request; or 

(C) unless prohibited by the foreign country’s law, by: 

(i) delivering a copy of the summons and of the complaint to the individual 

personally; or 

(ii) using any form of mail that the clerk addresses and sends to the 

individual and that requires a signed receipt; or 

(3) by other means not prohibited by international agreement, as the court orders. 

Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(f) (emphasis added).

Defendant, a UK-based entity, may be served by mail under Rule 4(f)(2)(C)(ii). Both the 

U.S. and the UK are signatories to the Hague Service Convention. Hague Service Convention, 

Nov. 15, 1965, 20 U.S.T. 361, T.I.A.S. No. 6638. Service “by postal channels” is expressly

permitted under Article 10 of the Hague Service Convention, “[p]rovided the State of destination 

does not object.” Id., art. 10. And the UK has not objected to service by mail under Article 10. 

See https://travel.state.gov/content/travel/en/legal/Judicial-Assistance-CountryInformation/UnitedKingdom.html (“The United Kingdom did not object to Article 10(a) of the 

Convention and does permit service via postal channels.”).

This Court has previously authorized service by mail under Rule 4(f)(2)(C)(ii) as to 

countries that have not objected to Article 10 of the Hague Service Convention. See, e.g., Vista 

Peak Ventures, LLC v. GiantPlus Tech. Co., No. 2:19-cv-00185-JRG, 2019 WL 4039917, at *2 

Case 2:23-cv-00229-JRG Document 10 Filed 05/25/23 Page 2 of 4 PageID #: 569
3

(E.D. Tex. Aug. 27, 2019) (authorizing service by mail to defendant located in Taiwan);

IntelliGender, LLC v. Soriano, No. 2:10-cv-00125-JRG, 2012 WL 215066, at *3 (E.D. Tex. Jan. 

24, 2012) (authorizing service by mail to defendant located in Chile). Accordingly, service by

mail to Defendant’s principal place of business in the UK is proper and reasonably calculated to 

give Defendant notice of this lawsuit. 

Pursuant to Rule 4(f)(2)(C)(ii), Willow will provide to the Clerk a pre-addressed envelope 

with pre-paid postage, along with the Complaint and Summons, for transmission by Federal 

Express to Defendant’s principal office in the UK at the address below, with signed receipt 

requested. 

Chiaro Technology, Limited 

63-66 Hatton Garden, Second Floor

London, United Kingdom, EC1N 8LE

 

Case 2:23-cv-00229-JRG Document 10 Filed 05/25/23 Page 3 of 4 PageID #: 570
4

Dated: May 25, 2023

/s/ Timothy S. Durst

O’MELVENY & MYERS LLP

Timothy S. Durst (TX #00786924)

tdurst@omm.com

Cason Garrett Cole (TX #24109741)

ccole@omm.com

2501 North Harwood Street, Suite 1700

Dallas, TX 75201

Telephone: (972) 360-1900

Facsimile: (972) 360-1901

Robert F. Shaffer (pro hac vice forthcoming)

rshaffer@omm.com

Jason Fountain (pro hac vice forthcoming)

jfountain@omm.com

1625 Eye St., NW

Washington, DC 20006

Telephone: (202) 383-5300

Facsimile: (202) 383-5414

Carolyn S. Wall (pro hac vice forthcoming)

cwall@omm.com

Times Square Tower

7 Times Square

New York, New York 10036

Telephone: (212) 326-2000

Facsimile: (212) 326-2061

Laura Burson (TX # 24091995) 

lburson@omm.com

400 South Hope St

Los Angeles, CA 90071

Telephone: (213) 430-6000

Facsimile: (213) 430-6407

Attorneys for Plaintiff

WILLOW INNOVATIONS, INC.

Case 2:23-cv-00229-JRG Document 10 Filed 05/25/23 Page 4 of 4 PageID #: 571