Judge: Melvin D. Sandvig, Case: 22CHCV00649, Date: 2024-11-08 Tentative Ruling

Counsel wishing to submit on a tentative ruling may inform the clerk or courtroom assisant in North Valley Department F47, 9425 Penfield Ave., Chatsworth, CA 91311, at (818) 407-2247.  Please be aware that unless all parties submit, the matter will still be called for hearing and may be argued by any appearing/non-submitting parties. If the matter is submitted on the court's tentative ruling by all parties, counsel for moving party shall give notice of ruling. This may be done by incorporating verbatim the court's tentative ruling. The tentative ruling may be extracted verbatim by copying and specially pasting, as unformatted text, from the Los Angeles Superior Court’s website, http://www.lasuperiorcourt.org. All hearings on law and motion and other calendar matters are generally NOT transcribed by a court reporter unless one is provided by the party(ies).

Case Number: 22CHCV00649    Hearing Date: November 8, 2024    Dept: F47

Dept. F47

Date: 11/8/24

Case #22CHCV00649

MOTION TO SERVE DEFENDANT VIA SECRETARY OF STATE

Motion filed on 8/23/24.

MOVING PARTY: Plaintiff Anthony Bouyer

RESPONDING PARTY: Defendant VIP Capitals, LLC

RELIEF REQUESTED: An order allowing Plaintiff to serve Defendant VIP Capitals, LLC, a California limited liability company, with service of process through the California Secretary of State.

RULING: The motion is denied without prejudice. 

SUMMARY OF FACTS & PROCEDURAL HISTORY

On 8/12/22, Plaintiff Anthony Bouyer (Plaintiff) filed this action against Defendant VIP Capitals, LLC (Defendant) for Violations of the Unruh Civil Rights Act (California Civil Code 51, et seq.). 

After making multiple unsuccessful attempts to serve Defendant through its agent, Azar Noroozy, at the address listed on the Secretary of State’s website and another address located for the agent, on 8/23/24, Plaintiff filed the instant motion seeking an order allowing Plaintiff to serve Defendant, a California limited liability company, with service of process through the California Secretary of State.  (See Manning Decl. and Exhibits attached thereto).  Since no other parties have appeared in the action, the motion was not served and there is no response to same.  See CCP 1014.

ANALYSIS

The motion sets forth authority regarding the individuals who may be served on behalf of a corporation – i.e., agent for service, president, chief executive officer, etc.  See CCP 416.10(a), (b).  (See Motion, p.2:18-p.3:9).  However, the motion does not cite authority for serving Defendant via the Secretary of State if Plaintiff is unable to accomplish service by serving an individual identified in CCP 416.10(a) or CCP 416.10(b).  (See Motion, generally).

CONCLUSION

The motion is denied without prejudice.