Filed: Jan. 07, 2015
Latest Update: Jan. 07, 2015
Summary: ORDER ALLISON CLAIRE, Magistrate Judge. This matter is before the undersigned pursuant to Local Rule 302(c)(21). Currently before the court is plaintiff's motion for service by publication upon defendant Ma Eliza Canggas Gilliam ("Defendant Canggas") pursuant to California Civil Procedural Code 415.50. ECF No. 8. The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure allow service upon individuals located within the United States according to the law for serving a summons "in the state where the district cou
Summary: ORDER ALLISON CLAIRE, Magistrate Judge. This matter is before the undersigned pursuant to Local Rule 302(c)(21). Currently before the court is plaintiff's motion for service by publication upon defendant Ma Eliza Canggas Gilliam ("Defendant Canggas") pursuant to California Civil Procedural Code 415.50. ECF No. 8. The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure allow service upon individuals located within the United States according to the law for serving a summons "in the state where the district cour..
More
ORDER
ALLISON CLAIRE, Magistrate Judge.
This matter is before the undersigned pursuant to Local Rule 302(c)(21). Currently before the court is plaintiff's motion for service by publication upon defendant Ma Eliza Canggas Gilliam ("Defendant Canggas") pursuant to California Civil Procedural Code § 415.50. ECF No. 8.
The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure allow service upon individuals located within the United States according to the law for serving a summons "in the state where the district court is located." Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(e). However, when serving an individual in a foreign country an individual must be served by an "internationally agreed means of service that is reasonably calculated to give notice, such as those authorized by the Hague Convention on the Service Abroad of Judicial and Extrajudicial Documents." Id. at 4(f)(1). "[I]f there is no internationally agreed means, or if an international agreement allows but does not specify other means," then an individual in a foreign country may be served "by [any] method that is reasonably calculated to give notice." Id. at 4(f)(2).
Plaintiff does not allege facts showing that Defendant Canggas is an individual currently in the United States. As noted above, reliance on state law for a method of service is appropriate only when an individual is located within the United States. Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(e)(1). Plaintiff does allege that he has attempted to effect personal service upon Defendant Canggas at her address, 7056 Lyndale Circle, Elk Grove, California 95758 ("the Property"). ECF No. 8, Exh. A at 2. However, it is unclear whether plaintiff is alleging that Defendant Canggas currently resides at the Property. For example, it is impossible to discern from plaintiff's motion whether those who attempted to serve Defendant Canggas had any contact with her at the Property. See id. Further, in a December 9, 2014 motion, plaintiff alleged in no uncertain terms that Defendant Canggas currently resides in the Philippines. ECF No. 6 at 2. Based on these facts the court finds that plaintiff has not established that Defendant Canggas is an individual in the United States.
Accordingly, service pursuant to Cal. Code Civ. P. § 415.50 is not appropriate.
If Defendant Canggas currently resides in the Philippines, then service following state law is not permitted and plaintiff must comply with Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(f).
Accordingly, THE COURT HEREBY DENIES plaintiff's motion for service by publication (ECF No. 8) without prejudice.1
