No CrossRef data available.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 10 March 2017
1 28 U.S.C. §1350 (2000).
2 28 U.S.C. §1350 note (2000).
3 Zhou v. Li Peng, 2002 WL 1835608, at *2 (S.D.N.Y. Aug. 8, 2002) (the order is referred to as a “Part I Order”). The court based the order on a similar order that was issued in Kadic v. Karadzic, 70F.3d232, 246 (2d Cir. 1995). In that case, the summons and complaint were provided to U.S. government personnel, who then delivered them to the defendant as contemplated in the court’s order. However, neither the propriety of the method of service set forth in the order, nor the validity of the service in the absence of actual delivery to the defendant, was contested in Kadic or addressed in the U.S. government’s statement of interest in that case. The defendant did assert that he was immune from service of process, an assertion rejected by the Second Circuit.
4 2002 WL 1835608, at *3-5.
5 Statement of Interest of the United States of America (June 1, 2001), Zhou v. Li Peng, 2002 WL 1835608 (S.D.N.Y. Aug. 8, 2002) (citations and footnote omitted).
6 Id. at 7.
7 Id. at 9.
8 Id. at 9-10.
9 2002 WL 1835608, at *14-15 (citations and footnote omitted).