Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-casd-3_15-cv-01595/USCOURTS-casd-3_15-cv-01595-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 110
Nature of Suit: Insurance
Cause of Action: 28:1332in Diversity-Insurance Contract

---

1

15cv1595 AJB (WVG)

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

NORTH AMERICAN COMPANY FOR 

LIFE AND HEALTH INSURANCE,

Plaintiff,

v.

JULIE RENEE MARTIN, ROLLIN 

CHARLES BENNETT, and JOSEPH 

RODERICK CLARK,

Defendants.

Case No.: 15cv1595 AJB (WVG)

ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S 

MOTION FOR AN EXTENSION OF 

TIME TO SERVE DEFENDANTS 

AND DENYING WITHOUT 

PREJUDICE PLAINTIFF’S 

REQUEST FOR AN ORDER 

AUTHORIZING ALTERNATE 

MEANS OF SERVICE

(Doc. No. 9)

Presently before the Court is Plaintiff North American Company for Life and 

Health Insurance’s (“Plaintiff”) motion for an extension of time to serve Defendant Julie 

Renee Martin (“Martin”) and to permit an alternative means of service. (Doc. No. 9.) In 

its motion, Plaintiff explains that Martin is residing in Mexico and Plaintiff has been 

unable to serve Martin within the time prescribed by Rule 4 of the Federal Rules of Civil 

Procedure. (Id. ¶ 10.) Plaintiff further represents that Martin has obtained counsel, but has 

not authorized her counsel to accept service of process on her behalf. (Id. ¶¶ 7, 9.) 

Plaintiff requests the Court exercise its discretionary powers under Rule 4(f)(3) and order 

that Plaintiff may serve Martin through an alternative means of service, specifically 

Case 3:15-cv-01595-AJB-WVG Document 10 Filed 11/18/15 Page 1 of 2
2

15cv1595 AJB (WVG)

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

through email or mail to Martin’s attorney or via ordinary mail to Martin’s mailing 

address in Chula Vista, California. (Id. ¶ 13.) 

Upon review of Plaintiff’s motion and the facts set forth therein, the Court finds 

good cause exists to extend the time for Plaintiff to serve Martin. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(m) 

(noting if a plaintiff shows good cause for the failure to timely serve a defendant, “the 

court must extend the time for service for an appropriate period”). Thus, the Court 

GRANTS Plaintiff’s request for an extension of time to serve Martin, and permits 

Plaintiff an additional sixty (60) days from the date of this order within which to properly 

effect service on Defendant Martin. The Court, however, DENIES WITHOUT 

PREJUDICE Plaintiff’s request for an order authorizing an alternative means of service. 

If Plaintiff is unable to properly effect service within the additional time allotted, Plaintiff 

may refile a properly noticed motion for an order authorizing an alternative means of 

service, including a discussion of the relevant legal standard, the specific alternative 

means of service requested, and whether such alternative means satisfy the requirements 

of due process and the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated: November 18, 2015

Case 3:15-cv-01595-AJB-WVG Document 10 Filed 11/18/15 Page 2 of 2