Mango v. Special Automotive Solutions

Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 San Francisco Division 11 GREGORY P. MANGO, Case No. 23-cv-03422-LB

12 Plaintiff, ORDER REGARDING SERVICE BY 13 v. EMAIL

14 SPECIAL AUTOMOTIVE SOLUTIONS, 15 Defendant. 16 17 The plaintiff in this case has moved for default judgment.1 Previously, the court authorized 18 service via the California Secretary of State after the plaintiff attempted service at the defendant’s 19 business address and through its corporate officers.2 This order requires the plaintiff to also 20 attempt service by email. 21 Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(e), a plaintiff may serve an individual defendant 22 using any method permitted by the law of the state in which the district court is located or in 23 which service is effected. Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(e)(1). California law allows for five basic methods of 24 service: (1) personal delivery to the party, see Cal. Civ. Proc. Code § 415.10; (2) delivery to 25 someone else at the party’s usual residence or place of business with mailing after (known as 26

27 1 Mot. – ECF No. 23. ] “substitute service”), see id. § 415.20; (3) service by mail with acknowledgment of receipt, see id. 2 § 415.30; (4) service on persons outside the state by certified or registered mail with a return 3 || receipt requested, see id. § 415.40; and (5) service by publication, see id. § 415.50. California 4 || Code of Civil Procedure § 413.30 also provides that a court “may direct that summons be served 5 in a manner which is reasonably calculated to give actual notice to the party served.” Courts in this 6 district have authorized service by email under California Civil Procedure Code § 413.30. See, 7 e.g., Cisco Sys., Inc. v. Shaitor, No. 18-cv-00480-LB, 2018 WL 3109398, at *3—4 (N.D. Cal. June 8 || 25,2018); Steve McCurry Studios, LLC v. Web2Web Mktg., Inc., No. C 13-80246 WHA, 2014 9 WL 1877547, at *2—3 (N.D. Cal. May 9, 2014); Facebook, Inc. v. Banana Ads, LLC, No. C-11- 10 || 3619 YGR, 2012 WL 1038752, at *3 (N.D. Cal. Mar. 27, 2012). 11 The court ask the plaintiff to attempt at the following email address: 12 || mquiries@specialautomotivesolutions.net. Steve McCurry Studios, 2014 WL 1877547, at *2 13 (email service is permissible following “‘reasonable’ attempts to serve” by other means); Toyo 14 Tire & Rubber Co. v. CIA Wheel Grp., No. 15-0246-DOC (DFMX), 2016 WL 1251008, at *3 3 15 (C.D. Cal. Mar. 25, 2016) (authorizing service by email using general business email addresses). 16 || Fora clean record, the court also asks the plaintiff to file proof of service (if successful) or a i 17 || statement explaining that service was unsuccessful, by February 28, 2024. 18 19 IT IS SO ORDERED. Ld: EC 20 Dated: February 20, 2024 LAUREL BEELER 21 United States Magistrate Judge 22 23 24 25 26 27 28