Opinion
2:23-CV-00247-JAD-VCF
02-28-2023
JYSAN HOLDING, LLC, a Nevada Limited Liability Company; JUSAN TECHNOLOGIES LTD, an England and Wales Limited Company; Plaintiffs, v. REPUBLIC OF KAZAKHSTAN, a foreign sovereign state; THE AGENCY FOR REGULATION AND DEVELOPMENT OF THE FINANCIAL MARKET OF THE REPUBLIC OF KAZAKHSTAN, a Kazakhstan Government agency; THE ANTICORRUPTION AGENCY OF THE REPUBLIC OF KAZAKHSTAN, a Kazakhstan Government anti-corruption agency; THE FINANCIAL MONITORING AGENCY OF THE REPUBLIC OF KAZAKHSTAN, a Kazakhstan Government agency; THE COMMITTEE FOR NATIONAL SECURITY OF KAZAKHSTAN, a Kazakhstan Government intelligence agency; MADINA ABYLKASSYMOVA, an individual; OLZHAS KIZATOV, an individual; ARMAN OMARBEKOV, an individual; and ADILBEK DZHAKSYBEKOV, an individual, Defendants.
HOLLAND & HART LLP J. Stephen Peek Erica C. Medley Tariq Mundiya (pro hac vice) Jeffrey B. Korn (pro hac vice) WILLKIE FARR & GALLAGHER LLP Michael J. Gottlieb (pro hac vice) WILLKIE FARR & GALLAGHER LLP Attorneys for Plaintiffs
HOLLAND & HART LLP J. Stephen Peek Erica C. Medley
Tariq Mundiya (pro hac vice) Jeffrey B. Korn (pro hac vice) WILLKIE FARR & GALLAGHER LLP
Michael J. Gottlieb (pro hac vice) WILLKIE FARR & GALLAGHER LLP
Attorneys for Plaintiffs
MOTION TO REISSUE SUMMONSES
CAM FERENBACH UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Plaintiffs Jysan Holding, LLC (“Jysan Holding”) and Jusan Technologies Ltd. (“JTL”) (collectively, “Plaintiffs”), in accordance with Fed.R.Civ.P. 4(j)(1) and 28 U.S.C. § 1608, hereby move to reissue summonses as to Defendants Republic of Kazakhstan, the Agency for Regulation and Development of the Financial Market of the Republic of Kazakhstan, the AntiCorruption Agency of the Republic of Kazakhstan, the Financial Monitoring Agency of the Republic of Kazakhstan, and the Committee for National Security of Kazakhstan (collectively, “Foreign State Defendants”). This Motion to Reissue Summonses (“Motion”) is based on the attached Memorandum of Points and Authorities and the exhibits attached thereto.
MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES
I. INTRODUCTION
Plaintiffs move to reissue summonses as to the Foreign State Defendants to comply with the enlarged timeframe of 60 days, rather than 21 days, provided under 28 U.S.C. § 1608(d). Plaintiffs previously submitted-and the Clerk of Court issued-standard summons forms as to all Defendants. To cure any potential deficiencies with service, Plaintiffs respectfully request that the Court direct the Clerk of Court to reissue the summonses as to the five Foreign State Defendants.
II. FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY
On February 16, 2023, Plaintiffs filed their Complaint in this action. See ECF No. 1. Five of the nine Defendants are considered either “[a] foreign state or its political subdivision, agency, or instrumentality” under Fed.R.Civ.P. 4(j)(1). These Foreign State Defendants are the Republic of Kazakhstan, the Agency for Regulation and Development of the Financial Market of the Republic of Kazakhstan (“ARDFM”), the Anti-Corruption Agency of the Republic of Kazakhstan (“AARK”), the Financial Monitoring Agency of the Republic of Kazakhstan (“FMA”), and the Committee for National Security of Kazakhstan (“KNB”). See ECF No. 1, ¶¶ 13-17.
On February 21, 2023, Plaintiffs submitted to the Court proposed summonses to be issued to all Defendants using the standard form AO 440. See ECF No. 4. The next day, the Clerk of Court issued the summonses. See ECF No. 5. Thereafter, Plaintiffs discovered the potential confusion for the Foreign State Defendants if the summonses issued by the Clerk of Court listed a deadline of 21 days to respond to service of summons and complaint, despite 28 U.S.C. § 1608(d), which provides a period of 60 days. Upon further research, Plaintiffs discovered that some federal district courts, such as the Southern District of New York and the District of Columbia, have standard summons forms to comply with 28 U.S.C. § 1608. See Exhibit A. Accordingly, Plaintiffs file the instant Motion to Reissue Summonses to cure any potential defects with service on the Foreign State Defendants and have proposed summonses for the Foreign State Defendants. See Exhibit B.
III. LEGAL ARGUMENT
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(j)(1) requires that service upon “[a] foreign state or its political subdivision, agency, or instrumentality must” be done in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 1608. Rather than the standard 21 days provided for in a summons in a civil action, 28 U.S.C. § 1608 requires that a foreign state and its political subdivisions, agencies, and instrumentalities receive 60 days to serve an answer or other responsive pleading to the complaint. See 28 U.S.C. § 1608(d).
Here, Plaintiffs request that the Court direct the Clerk of Court to reissue summonses as to the Foreign State Defendants to comply with the requirements of 28 U.S.C. § 1608(d). In furtherance of this request, Plaintiffs attach Exhibit A, which includes two examples of forms from other federal district courts specifically tailored for 28 U.S.C. § 1608 and Exhibit B, which comprises the proposed revised summonses for the District of Nevada and addressed to each of the Foreign State Defendants.
IV. CONCLUSION
Plaintiffs respectfully request that the Court direct the Clerk of Court to reissue summonses as to the Foreign State Defendants, as proposed in Exhibit B.
IT IS SO ORDERED.