Such is the rule of this circuit. Pulson v. American Rolling Mill Co., 1 Cir., 1948, 170 F.2d 193; Kelley v. Delaware, L. W.R. Co., 1 Cir., 1948, 170 F.2d 195; see also Canvas Fabricators, Inc., v. Hooper Sons Co., supra, 199 F.2d 486; Olshansky v. Thyer Mfg. Corp., D.C.N.D.Ill. 1952, 13 F.R.D. 227, 230; Read v. Corbitt Co., D.C.E.D.Pa. 1950, 10 F.R.D. 125. And this position is further enforced by the fact that the validity of the service of process is predicated upon a state statute.

ir., 1954, 209 F.2d 173, 176; Lone Star Package Car Co. v. Baltimore O.R. Co., 5 Cir., 1954, 212 F.2d 147, reverses Insurance Co. of North America v. Lone Star Package Car Co., D.C., 107 F. Supp. 645 as to Baltimore Ohio; Isenberg v. Atlanta Coast Line R. Co., D.C.Mass. 1949, 82 F. Supp. 927, 928; Doyle v. Southern Pacific Co., D.C.Mo. 1949, 87 F. Supp. 974; Wadell v. Green Textile Associates, D.C.Mass. 1950, 92 F. Supp. 738, 741; Green v. Equitable Powder Mfg. Co., D.C.Ark. 1951, 99 F. Supp. 237; Allentown Record Co., Inc., v. Agrashell, Inc., D.C.Pa. 1951, 101 F. Supp. 790; Insurance Co. of North America v. Lone Star Package Car Co., D.C.Tex. 1952, 107 F. Supp. 645, 654; Miller v. Tulsa Petroleum Co., D.C. Pa. 1953, 117 F. Supp. 359; Convery v. Clairol, Inc., D.C.Pa. 1954, 123 F. Supp. 29; Solt v. Interstate Folding Box Co., D.C.Pa. 1954, 123 F. Supp. 376; General Electric Co. v. Central Transit Warehouse Co., D.C.Mo. 1955, 127 F. Supp. 817, 821; Read v. Corbitt Co., D.C.Pa. 1950, 10 F.R.D. 125, 128. See: Cole v. Stonhard Co., D.C.N.Y. 1952, 12 F.R.D. 508, 510.

"I hereby certify and return, that on the 1st day of April 1954 I received the within summons and on April 2, 1954, served the same upon Clairol, Incorporated by leaving a copy thereof, together with a copy of the complaint, with Mrs. Abrams, wife of Mr. Murray Abrams, District Manager for the said Corporation, — at 45 Crimson King Lane, Levittown, Pa., and making contents of same known to Mrs. Abrams." Read v. Corbitt Co., D.C.E.D.Pa., 10 F.R.D. 125. The facts before the Court are as follows:

The motion must be decided on the facts averred in the complaint and a deposition which for the purpose of this motion will be accepted as true. Read v. Corbitt Co., D.C.E.D.Pa., 10 F.R.D. 125. Defendant, a manufacturer of folding boxes, is an Ohio corporation with its principal place of business in Middletown, Ohio. It has maintained an office in Philadelphia for about thirty years, of which the last three years has been in one room located at 23 Maplewood Avenue.

Since jurisdiction over this case is based upon diversity of citizenship only, I must apply the Pennsylvania law of "doing business" to determine the validity of service of process. Pulson v. American Rolling Mill Co., 1 Cir., 170 F.2d 193; Read v. Corbitt Co., D.C., 10 F.R.D. 125, 128. The recent opinion of Judge Grim of this court in Moore v. Atlantic Coast Line R. Co., D.C., 98 F. Supp. 375, is distinguishable since that case involved a federal question.