Qandah v. Johor Corporation et al

Filing 16

STIPULATED ORDER concerning Waiver of Service of Process and denying 14 Motion for Alternate Service. Signed by District Judge Robert H. Cleland. (LWag)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION ) ) ) ) ) Case No. 2:17-cv-11126-RHC) EAS ) ) Hon. Robert H. Cleland ) ) ) ) NATALIE QANDAH, a citizen of the United States of America Plaintiff, v. JOHOR CORPORATION, a Malaysian Company and YB DATO KAMARUZZAMAN BIN ABU KASSIM, a citizen of Malaysia. Defendants. STIPULATED ORDER CONCERNING WAIVER OF SERVICE OF PROCESS This matter having come before the Court upon the stipulation of the parties; the Court being advised that the parties disagree whether service of the initial Complaint properly was effected upon the Defendants; the Defendants having raised the defense of improper service, among other defenses, in their Motion to Dismiss First Amended Complaint (Doc #11) (“Motion to Dismiss”); Plaintiff having filed a Motion to Deem Service Effected on Defendants or, Alternatively, Motion for Alternative Service and to Establish Time for Service (Doc #14) (“Motion Regarding Service”); and the Court being advised that in an effort to resolve this one 1 4822-4486-8427, v. 1 particular issue, Defendants have agreed to waive service pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 4; IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 1. Service of the initial Complaint and First Amended Complaint are hereby deemed waived pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 4. Waiver of service shall not be deemed a waiver of any other defenses or objections that Defendants might have regarding the lawsuit; 2. Defendants’ specific objection regarding service of process set forth in their pending Motion to Dismiss (Doc #11, Pg ID 166 and 176) is moot. All of Defendants’ other objections and issues set forth in the Motion to Dismiss remain and are not impacted by this Order and will be addressed by the parties and the Court in the ordinary course pursuant to the schedule in the July 5, 2017, Order (Doc #13); 3. Plaintiff’s Motion Regarding Service (Doc #14) is denied without prejudice as moot; and 4. Nothing herein shall be construed as an endorsement by either Plaintiff or Defendants as each other’s arguments regarding service of process. IT IS SO ORDERED. S/Robert H. Cleland ROBERT H. CLELAND UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE Dated: July 18, 2017 2 4822-4486-8427, v. 1 I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing document was mailed to counsel of record and/or pro se parties on this date, July 18, 2017, by electronic and/or ordinary mail. S/Lisa Wagner Case Manager and Deputy Clerk (810) 292-6522 3 4822-4486-8427, v. 1 Stipulated and Agreed as to form and substance: /s/ Natalie C. Qandah Natalie C. Qandah (P58434) On behalf of herself /s/ Benjamin W. Jeffers Benjamin W. Jeffers (P57161) Limited Appearance on behalf of Defendants Dated: July 14, 2017 4 4822-4486-8427, v. 1

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?