ORDER

DOMINIC W. LANZA, District Judge.

Pending before the Court is Plaintiff Pacesetter Consulting, LLC's Motion for Alternative Service (Doc. 14). Plaintiff failed to cite any rule or law that would permit the Court to grant Plaintiff leave to effectuate service of process in a manner ostensibly not otherwise authorized under the federal rules.

Rule 4(e) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure provides three ways to serve an individual within a judicial district of the United States, and additionally provides that such an individual "may be served . . . by following state law for serving a summons in an action brought in courts of general jurisdiction in the state where the district court is located or where service is made." Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(e).

The Court notes that Rule 4.2(b) of the Arizona Rules of Civil Procedure permits a party to serve process outside Arizona, but within the United States, "in the same manner as provided in Rules 4.1(d) through (j)," which does not encompass Rule 4.1(k) (permitting a court to order that service of process within Arizona may be accomplished in a manner not otherwise allowed under the Rules).

Because Plaintiff failed to cite any rule or law that would permit the Court to grant Plaintiff leave to effectuate service of process in a manner ostensibly not otherwise authorized under the federal rules, the Court denies Plaintiff's motion without prejudice. Plaintiff may file, within 14 days of the date of this Order, a new motion for leave to serve by alternative means, clearly explaining what rules or laws permit the Court to grant the relief requested.

Accordingly,

IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiff's request for leave to effectuate service by alternative means is denied without prejudice (Doc. 14).

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff may file, within 14 days of the date of this Order, a new motion for leave to serve by alternative means. The motion must clearly explain the rules and/or laws that would permit the Court to grant the relief it seeks.