Zithromia Limited et al v. Gazeus Negocios De Internet SA et al

Filing 21

ORDER re 17 Application for Alternate Service on Defendants. Initial case management conference set for 4/5/2018 at 10:00 AM in San Francisco, Courtroom 11, 19th Floor. Case management statement due by 3/29/2018. Signed by Judge James Donato on 3/5/2018. (jdlc3S, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 3/5/2018)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 7 ZITHROMIA LIMITED, et al., Plaintiffs, 8 9 10 ORDER RE RENEWED APPLICATION FOR ALTERNATIVE SERVICE v. GAZEUS NEGOCIOS DE INTERNET SA, et al., 11 United States District Court Northern District of California Case No. 3:17-cv-06475-JD Re: Dkt. No. 17 Defendants. 12 13 The Court previously denied on several grounds plaintiffs’ “ex parte” applications for 14 alternative service on defendants, who are located in Brazil, and a TRO. Dkt. No. 16. Plaintiffs 15 have now filed a renewed application for alternative service. Dkt. No. 17. The salient changed 16 circumstances since plaintiffs’ initial application include the fact that defendants have specially 17 appeared in the case through California counsel, Dkt. No. 15, and that defendants have not 18 responded to delivery of the pleadings and other papers. Dkt. No. 17-1 at 11. 19 An order of service under Rule 4(f)(3) is GRANTED. Service of the complaint may be 20 made on Mark Riera, the counsel of record for specially appearing defendants here. See Xilinx, 21 Inc. v. Godo Kaisha IP Bridge 1, 246 F. Supp. 3d 1260 (N.D. Cal. 2017)). Plaintiffs should email 22 the complaint to attorney Riera and send a hard copy by registered mail through the United States 23 Postal Service to his law office. An initial case management conference is set for April 5, 2018 at 24 10:00AM. 25 IT IS SO ORDERED. 26 Dated: March 5, 2018 27 28 JAMES DONATO United States District Judge

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?