Serje et al v. Rappi, Inc. et al

Filing 23

ORDER DENYING FOURTH MOTION TO EXTEND TIME TO COMPLETE SERVICE 21 ; SECOND ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE. Show Cause Response due by 10/30/2020. Signed by Judge Kandis A. Westmore on 10/15/20. (dtmS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 10/15/2020)

Case 4:19-cv-07415-KAW Document 23 Filed 10/15/20 Page 1 of 2

1
2
3
4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

5

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

6
7

MAURICIO PABA SERJE, et al.,
Plaintiffs,

8
v.

9
10

RAPPI, INC., et al.,
Defendants.

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11

Case No. 4:19-cv-07415-KAW
ORDER DENYING FOURTH MOTION
TO EXTEND TIME TO COMPLETE
SERVICE; SECOND ORDER TO
SHOW CAUSE
Re: Dkt. No. 21

12
This action was filed on November 8, 2019. (Dkt. No. 1.) On June 3, 2020, the Court

13
14

extended Plaintiff’s deadline to complete service of the complaint and summons on Defendants to

15

August 5, 2020. (Dkt. No. 17.) To date, no proof of service has been filed.1
On July 20, 2020, the Court granted Plaintiffs’ counsel’s motion to withdraw, such that

16
17

Plaintiffs are now pro se. (Dkt. No. 19.) A case management conference was scheduled for

18

October 6, 2020, but Plaintiffs did not file a case management statement seven days prior as

19

required, so the Court vacated the case management conference and issued an order to show cause

20

to Plaintiffs on October 2, 2020. (Dkt. No. 22.)
Minutes before the order to show cause was docketed, Plaintiff Mauricio Paba Serje filed a

21
22

notice of appearance and a fourth motion for extension of time to complete service. (Notice of

23

Appearance, Dkt. No. 20; Pls.’ Mot., Dkt. No. 21.) There are several reasons, however, why the

24

motion must be denied.
First, Mr. Serje filed it on behalf of all of the plaintiffs, which is improper because he is not

25
26

an attorney admitted to practice in the Northern District of California, and, therefore, can only file

27
28

1

Certificates of service must be separately docketed. Thus, the Court strikes the documents
attached to Dkt. No. 21.

Case 4:19-cv-07415-KAW Document 23 Filed 10/15/20 Page 2 of 2

1
2

papers on his own behalf.
Second, the email for his ECF account ([e-mail]), as reflected on the

3

docket, belongs to attorney Christian Cadena Flechas of Bogota, Columbia. (Christian Cardena

4

Flechas – Abogado, LINKEDIN, https://co.linkedin.com/in/christian-cadena-flechas-

5

b261a031?challengeId=AQHr8Zto8UH2SAAAAXT5xgZZbsFIlm7pOQmOZTeuIDg1cgypYGh7

6

l1QijDys8SBKRIr2EayOl_sU7-DI6hipD6IkS3E9I36mdw&submissionId=bc4dd8d2-3d28-3b16-

7

6ac8-c6e0c86c2f36 (last visited Oct. 5, 2020).) Third, the street address on Mr. Serje’s notice of

8

appearance (Dkt. No. 20) is the same address as Mr. Cadena Flechas’s law firm, Lozano Blanco &

9

Associates. (See Lozano Blanco & Associates, https://lozanoblanco.com/en/home/#contact (last
visited Oct. 5, 2020).) Taken together, it is apparent that Mr. Serje is not truly representing

11

United States District Court
Northern District of California

10

himself despite his declaration to the contrary. (Decl. of Mauricio Paba Serje, Dkt. No. 21-1 ¶ 1.)

12

Mr. Cadena-Flechas has not filed a substitution of counsel form, and he does not appear to be

13

qualified to represent clients in this district. Instead, Mr. Cadena-Flechas appears to be engaging

14

in the unauthorized practice of law, as all case-related emails are going to his email address rather

15

than to Mr. Serje. This is improper and will not be permitted.

16

For the reasons set forth above, Plaintiffs’ motion is DENIED. Mr. Serje is ordered to file

17

an amended notice of appearance within 7 days of this order that contains his own street address

18

and email address, and he shall update his ECF account to ensure that he personally receives all

19

filings in this case. In addition, Mr. Serje is ordered to remove the email address for Mr. Cadena-

20

Flechas from his ECF account because he is not a proper person to receive notice of filings in this

21

case. If Mr. Cadena-Flechas is or becomes qualified to practice law in this district, and he wishes

22

to represent the plaintiffs in this case, a proper substitution of counsel shall be filed.

SECOND ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE

23
24
25
26
27

Plaintiffs are ordered to respond to the October 2, 2020 order to show cause by October 30,
2020, as originally ordered. (See Dkt. No. 22.)
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: October 15, 2020

__________________________________
KANDIS A. WESTMORE
United States Magistrate Judge

28
2