Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-5_20-cv-00411/USCOURTS-cand-5_20-cv-00411-3/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 485
Nature of Suit: 
Cause of Action: 47:227 Restrictions of Use of Telephone Equipment

---

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

Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

ALEXANDER MARTIN VON 

BRANDENFELS,

Plaintiff,

v.

ROOMSTER CORP,

Defendant.

Case No. 20-cv-00411-SVK 

ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S 

EX PARTE APPLICATION FOR 

ALTERNATIVE SERVICE 

Re: Dkt. No. 35

On May 6, 2020, Defendant Roomster Corp. filed the instant ex parte application for 

alternative service pursuant to Rule 45 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Dkt. 35. 

Defendant seeks to serve a subpoena to testify at a deposition and produce documents to thirdparty Christina White via an email to Plaintiff, whom White is currently residing with. Dkt. 35 at 

1-2; Dkt. 35-4 at 2. Defendant also asks this Court to require Plaintiff to confirm, within twentyfour (24) hours of receipt of email service, that he has provided the subpoena to White. Id. 

Rule 45 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure states that “[s]erving a subpoena requires 

delivering a copy to the named person.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 45(b)(1). “The majority of courts 

understand ‘delivering’ to require personal service of the subpoena.” Fujikura Ltd. v. Finsar 

Corp., No. 15-mc-80110-HRL (JSC), 2015 WL 5782351, at *5 (N.D. Cal. Oct. 5, 2015). 

However, “[c]ourts have permitted parties to serve Rule 45 subpoenas by alternative methods of 

service other than personal service.” Toni Brattin & Co. v. Mosaic Int’l, LLC, No. 15-mc-80090-

MEJ, 2015 WL 1844056, at *3 (N.D. Cal. April 9, 2015). “Courts are more inclined to grant such 

alternative service where the serving party has provided sufficient evidence of its earlier diligence 

in attempting to effectuate personal service.” Fujikura Ltd., 2015 WL 5782351, at *5. Here, 

Defendant has demonstrated that it has attempted personal service on White multiple times to no 

Case 5:20-cv-00411-SVK Document 38 Filed 05/15/20 Page 1 of 2
2

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

Northern District of California

avail. Dkt. 25 at 4-6; see also Dkt. 35-1; Dkt. 35-2; Dkt. 35-3. The Court also takes into 

consideration the impediments to personal service effected by the current COVID-19 restrictions 

in place in the State of California. Accordingly, the Court GRANTS Defendant’s application. 

Defendant is ORDERED to serve third-party Cristina White by emailing the subpoena to 

Plaintiff. Plaintiff is ORDERED to confirm with Defendant that he has provided the subpoena to 

White within twenty-four (24) hours of receipt of email service. 

SO ORDERED.

Dated: May 15, 2020

SUSAN VAN KEULEN

United States Magistrate Judge

Case 5:20-cv-00411-SVK Document 38 Filed 05/15/20 Page 2 of 2