4. How does Rule 4(n) differ from the other service rules so far discussed? Under what circumstances may the federal court piggy-back on a state law authorizing jurisdiction on the seizure of assets? Does the service rule also apply to intangible property? In Office Depot, Inc. v. Zuccarini, 596 F.3d 696 (9th Cir. 2010), the appeals court affirmed that quasi in rem jurisdiction can be obtained under Rule 4(n) by attaching any form of property; the court held that domain names are personal property subject to attachment wherever the domain registry is located.