⚖ Oral Arguments, with Context

The Eleventh Circuit hears an appeal by two overseas online sellers in a trademark case brought by Adidas. Adidas accused the websites of selling counterfeit products bearing its marks. The district court authorized Adidas to serve the lawsuit by email and by posting documents on a notice website. The sellers' lawyer appeared before judgment, but they did not defend the claims before the court entered a default judgment. About five months later, they asked to set it aside, challenging service and offering settlement negotiations as a reason for the delay. The district judge upheld service and refused to reopen the judgment. Their lawyer will argue that the Hague Service Convention, which governs delivery of lawsuit papers abroad, did not permit this method and left the court without jurisdiction. He will say their settlement efforts justify the time they took to challenge the judgment. The lawyer for Adidas will argue that the electronic service was permissible and that the sellers waited too long after learning of the case. The judges will also examine whether enough was done to find the sellers' physical addresses, because unknown addresses can change whether the treaty applies. The immediate question is whether this judgment can stand, not a fresh trial about whether particular products were counterfeit.

Adidas v. Localityi.com (No. 25-12597) — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit, argued November 4, 2026.