GS Holistic, LLC v. Xotic Smokes Inc

• Court: District Court, N.D. California
• Decided: March 1, 2024
• Docket: 4:22-cv-07628
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 2 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 3 4 5 GS HOLISTIC, LLC, Case No. 22-cv-07628-NC Plaintiff, ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE RE 6 PERSONAL JURISDICTION 7 v. OVER MULHAM ALHAMDANI XOTIC SMOKES INC, et al., Re: ECF 48 Defendants. 9 10 Plaintiff GS Holistic moves for default judgment against defendants Xotic Smokes, 11 |) Murad, Mulham, and Hashem Alhamdani, and Entesar Dargan. ECF 48. This Court does 12 || not find it has personal jurisdiction over Mulham Alhamdani and orders GS to show cause 13 |} why Mulham should not be dismissed for lack of personal jurisdiction. 14 GS consistently served Mulham Alhamdani in Ohio. See ECF 19, 37, 49. GS does 15 |} not explain Mulham’s Ohio address in its complaint or motion for default judgment. See 16 || ECF 1,48. This Court finds GS’s contention that Mulham is domiciled in California and 5 17 || thus this Court has general personal jurisdiction over him suspect: Mulham was the only 5 18 || defendant not served at a California address. See, e.g., ECF 49. And GS has not 19 |} demonstrated Mulham is otherwise subject to specific personal jurisdiction. See 20 || Schwarzenegger v. Fred Martin Motor Co., 374 F.3d 797, 802 (9th Cir. 2004) (outlining 21 || three-part test for specific personal jurisdiction). 22 GS must show cause why this Court should not recommend dismissal of Mulham 23 || Alhamdani for lack of personal jurisdiction. GS must reply in writing by March 15, 2024. 24 || If GS fails to reply, this Court will recommend dismissing Mulham for lack of personal 25 || jurisdiction. 26 IT IS SO ORDERED. 27 || Dated: March 1, 2024 fhe NATHANAEL M. COUSINS 28 United States Magistrate Judge