Follow by Email

Saturday, August 29, 2009

United States Senate Bill 1606. Good for Process Servers?

U.S. Senate Bill 1606 was introduced in the current session of congress. It would require foreign manufacturers of products imported into the United States to establish registered agents in the United States who are authorized to accept service of process against such manufacturers, and for other purposes.

Is this a good thing for private process servers? It appears to me that this bill in its current form would take a step toward leveling the playing field for domestic and foreign manufacturers that produce products that harm U.S. consumers.

I fail to see how that is a bad thing. I am sure it could be argued than it might drive some prices of products up that are imported into the U.S. because foreign manufacturers would be more likely to be held accountable for faulty products.

One reason they are not currently held accountable is because it is very expensive and time consuming to go after foreign manufacturers. One of the expensive and time consuming hurdles is the act of serving process internationally. It appears this bill removes that hurdle. Because the service of process on foreign entities is time consuming and expensive and requires a professional that specializes in providing these services. For a select few process serving agencies this bill could adversely impact their business.

For the vast majority of process servers this bill could result in more cases being filed against foreign manufactures and in turn mean more primary service of process, more discovery as well as more secondary service of process to be served domestically.

I have had a few discussions with fellow process servers and most feel this bill is a positive step forward for the private process server in the United States. A few other process servers are not so sure. Personally, I fall into the camp that would support the bill in its current form.

What do you think? I raise the question because nobody else is. I raise the question to create awareness about this bill. A few in the NAPPS leadership are aware of the bill. Thus far it has not been assigned to the legislative committee but is however being monitored by the International Committee. I do not know about you but I do not know what that means.

I believe the NAPPS leadership needs to hear form you on this topic; otherwise they will operate in a vacuum believing that they know what is in your best interest. Maybe they do, that is why they were elected right?

I believe what you think is more important than letting this issue remain quite.

This post represents my personal observations and should not be construed to be the opinion or position of anyone else or any organization.