Court Denies Email Service in Cryptocurrency Scam Lawsuit
On Thursday, May 8, 2025, Magistrate Judge Joseph C. Spero of the United States District Court for the Northern District of California denied a motion for alternative service filed by plaintiff Min Ji Goo Dyer in the case *Dyer v. Does*. The plaintiff, representing herself without an attorney, sought permission to serve a defendant via email in a lawsuit alleging a complex cryptocurrency scam.
Dyer claims she was targeted through email and text messages in a scheme that led to financial losses. Initially unable to identify the perpetrators, she named ten unidentified individuals, referred to as Does 1-10, as defendants. Through extensive third-party discovery, Dyer obtained information linking an individual named Chike Ezeh, a resident of Nigeria, to the alleged scam.
Evidence suggested Ezeh was associated with an account where Dyer had deposited funds, which were later stolen, as directed by the scammers. Following this discovery, Dyer amended her complaint to name Ezeh as a defendant and requested court approval to serve him by emailing the complaint to an address linked to the account.
The court’s ruling denied the motion without prejudice, meaning Dyer may refile with additional evidence. Judge Spero evaluated the request under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(f), which outlines methods for serving individuals in foreign countries. The rule allows service through internationally agreed-upon methods, such as The Hague Convention, or other means that comply with due process if no international agreement applies. Since Nigeria is not a party to The Hague Convention or any relevant treaty with the United States, service by email is not prohibited, but it must be reasonably calculated to provide notice to the defendant.
The court found insufficient evidence to confirm that serving Ezeh via the identified email address would meet due process requirements. Dyer’s submissions showed the scammers frequently communicated with her using a different email address, but there was no record of communications from the subject email account. The only link to this email was customer information from a third-party subpoena, indicating it was associated with Ezeh’s account. However, the court noted that login records from February 3, 2025, and other dates did not clearly show the email was actively used for authentication, as access could have been verified through other means, such as a mobile phone number.
Judge Spero contrasted this case with others where email service was approved, such as when defendants actively used the email for business or litigation-related communication. Here, the limited evidence suggested the email was used infrequently, possibly only three times in nearly four years. The court also highlighted alternative service options, noting that Dyer had obtained Ezeh’s address and phone number, which could enable service through mail, a local agent, or letters rogatory, as permitted in Nigeria.
The order allows Dyer to renew her motion by August 8, 2025, provided she presents evidence that the proposed service method—whether email or another approach—is reliable and meets due process standards. The court may extend this deadline if Dyer demonstrates specific efforts to gather additional evidence.
Please contact BlockTribune for access to a copy of this filing.
