28 U.S.C. § 3004
Service of process; enforcement; notice
The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, referred to in subsec. (a), are set out in the Appendix to this title.
Section effective 180 days after
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 20
cases (7 in the last 5 years), 1993–2026 · leading case: Reese Bros. v. United States Postal Service
Reese Bros. v. United States Postal Service (2007)
“28 U.S.C. § 3004 . But unlike those statutes, the FDCPA’s nationwide service of process provision is not contingent upon minimum contacts with the local district.”
Lone Star Industries, Inc. v. Rankin County Economic Development District (In Re New York Trap Rock Corp.) (1993)
“4933 (1990), enacting 28 U.S.C. § 3004 . The Act provided for automatic transfer to the district of the defendant's residence, but only if such a request is made within 20 days of various relevant events.”
United States v. Mathews (2011)
“” 28 U.S.C. § 3004 (b)(2). And sixth, after consideration of any objection, the court “shall promptly enter [a disposition] order directing the garnishee as to the disposition .”
United States v. Lazorwitz (2005)
“” 28 U.S.C. § 3004 (b)(1)(A) and (B). Here, a valid judgment was entered against Defendant Lazorwitz on September 28, 2005, and the restitution order has not been satisfied.”
Kelley v. College of St. Benedict (2012)
“” 28 U.S.C. § 3004 (c) (emphases added). Similarly, § 3012 authorizes the United States to join non-debtor defendants as parties.”
United States v. Preston (2013)
“See 28 U.S.C. § 3004 (b)(1). One judge in this district has said that this is so, that the “[operation of [the FDCPA’s] nationwide service of process provision .”
Ullah v. Federal Deposit Insurance (1994)
“§ 1692i (limitation of venue in consumer debt collection cases to where the consumer signed a contract or resided at the time the suit was filed); 28 U.S.C. § 3004 (b)(2) (in federal debt collection suits, debtor can request transfer to district of residence); Spiegel v.”
United States v. Edward M. Nash (1999)
“28 U.S.C. § 3004 (b)(2) states in pertinent part as follows: “If the debtor so requests, within 20 days after receiving the notice [of the garnishment proceeding], the action or proceeding in which the writ, order, or judgment was issued shall be transferred to the district…”
United States v. Klearman (1999)
“The first sought transfer pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 3004 (2)(b), a venue provision of the Federal Debt Collections Procedures Act.”
United States v. Liounis (2026)
“” 28 U.S.C. § 3004 (b)(2). The * The Clerk of Court is directed to amend the caption as set forth above.”
United States v. Steven Zinnel (2025)
“” 28 U.S.C. § 3004 (b)(2). Notwithstanding this mandatory directive, courts disagree on whether a district court has discretion to deny the debtor’s transfer request.”
United States v. O'Brien (2021)
“” 28 U.S.C. § 3004 (b)(2). Other courts are divided as to whether a venue transfer under § 3004(b)(2) is mandatory.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.