In which situation can a district court order service upon a person in foreign litigation?

The ability of a district court to order service upon a person in foreign litigation is fundamentally rooted in the principles of personal jurisdiction. When a person is identified as being within the jurisdiction of any U.S. district, it implies that the court has the authority to exercise jurisdiction over that individual. This authority allows the court to order service of process on the person, regardless of the fact that the litigation might be concerning actions that occurred in a foreign country.

Personal jurisdiction is grounded in the defendant's connections to the forum state. If an individual is physically present within the boundaries of a U.S. district, that presence is sufficient to establish jurisdiction, thereby enabling the court to mandate the service of legal documents to that person. It reflects the principle that a person present in a jurisdiction can be compelled to respond to legal proceedings occurring there.

In contrast, the other options do not hold up in this context. While a person can reside in another country (first option), that does not guarantee that a U.S. district court has jurisdiction over them for service of process, as jurisdiction typically requires connections to the U.S. territory. Additionally, whether a person is a corporate entity (third option) also does not inherently provide a basis for service unless specific jurisdictional requirements are