Laimont v. Rakesh

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA TANEISHA LAIMONT, et al., Case No. 20-cv-04702-VC Plaintiffs, ORDER DENYING MOTION TO DISMISS, MOTION TO STRIKE, AND V. MOTION FOR A MORE DEFINITE STATEMENT; QUASHING SERVICE RAMDE RAKESH, et al., AND ORDERING PROPER SERVICE Defendants. Re: Dkt. No. 27 The plaintiff has not met her burden to show that she effectively served the defendants. In this situation, the Court has discretion to dismiss the case or quash the ineffective service that has been made and give the plaintiff another opportunity to effectuate service. See Bernhoft Law Firm, S.C. v. Pollock, 2012 WL 5511777, at *2 (S.D. Cal. Nov. 14, 2012). As discussed at the hearing, the case will not be dismissed, and the motion to dismiss is denied, but the earlier service is quashed and the plaintiff has until April 15, 2021 to serve the defendants. The defendants must respond within 14 days of service. The motion to strike and motion for a more definite statement are denied as moot, given the threshold jurisdictional issue regarding service.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: March 19, 2021 Lo.

VINCE CHHABRIA United States District Judge