Opinion
23-cv-03422-LB
02-20-2024
GREGORY P. MANGO, Plaintiff, v. SPECIAL AUTOMOTIVE SOLUTIONS, Defendant.
ORDER REGARDING SERVICE BY EMAIL
LAUREL BEELER United States Magistrate Judge
The plaintiff in this case has moved for default judgment. Previously, the court authorized service via the California Secretary of State after the plaintiff attempted service at the defendant's business address and through its corporate officers. This order requires the plaintiff to also attempt service by email.
Mot. - ECF No. 23.
Orders - ECF Nos. 12, 16.
Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(e), a plaintiff may serve an individual defendant using any method permitted by the law of the state in which the district court is located or in which service is effected. Fed.R.Civ.P. 4(e)(1). California law allows for five basic methods of service: (1) personal delivery to the party, see Cal. Civ. Proc. Code § 415.10; (2) delivery to someone else at the party's usual residence or place of business with mailing after (known as “substitute service”), see Id. § 415.20; (3) service by mail with acknowledgment of receipt, see Id. § 415.30; (4) service on persons outside the state by certified or registered mail with a return receipt requested, see Id. § 415.40; and (5) service by publication, see Id. § 415.50. California Code of Civil Procedure § 413.30 also provides that a court “may direct that summons be served in a manner which is reasonably calculated to give actual notice to the party served.” Courts in this district have authorized service by email under California Civil Procedure Code § 413.30. See, e.g., Cisco Sys., Inc. v. Shaitor, No. 18-cv-00480-LB, 2018 WL 3109398, at *3-4 (N.D. Cal. June 25, 2018); Steve McCurry Studios, LLC v. Web2Web Mktg., Inc., No. C 13-80246 WHA, 2014 WL 1877547, at *2-3 (N.D. Cal. May 9, 2014); Facebook, Inc. v. Banana Ads, LLC, No. C-11-3619 YGR, 2012 WL 1038752, at *3 (N.D. Cal. Mar. 27, 2012).
The court ask the plaintiff to attempt at the following email address: inquiries@specialautomotivesolutions.net. Steve McCurry Studios, 2014 WL 1877547, at *2 (email service is permissible following “‘reasonable' attempts to serve” by other means); Toyo Tire & Rubber Co. v. CIA Wheel Grp., No. 15-0246-DOC (DFMX), 2016 WL 1251008, at *3 (C.D. Cal. Mar. 25, 2016) (authorizing service by email using general business email addresses). For a clean record, the court also asks the plaintiff to file proof of service (if successful) or a statement explaining that service was unsuccessful, by February 28, 2024.
IT IS SO ORDERED.