Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_18-cv-05411/USCOURTS-cand-3_18-cv-05411-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 791
Nature of Suit: Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA)
Cause of Action: 29:1001 E.R.I.S.A.: Employee Retirement

---

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

OPERATING ENGINEERS' HEALTH 

AND WELFARE TRUST FUND FOR 

NORTHERN CALIFORNIA, et al.,

Plaintiffs,

v.

AG-TECH INC.,

Defendant.

Case No. 18-cv-05411-JSC 

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE RE:

SERVICE OF PROCESS

Re: Dkt. No. 22

In this civil action, Plaintiffs, several employee benefit plans and their trustees, the Heavy 

and Highway Committee, and the Operating Engineers Local Union No. 3 of the International 

Union of Operating Engineers AFL-CIO, allege that Defendant Ag-Tech, Inc. failed to pay 

contributions to the trust funds as required by the parties’ bargaining agreements. Plaintiffs’ 

motion for default judgment requesting unpaid contributions, liquidated damages, interest, and 

attorneys’ fees and costs is now pending before the Court. Because the Court has concerns 

regarding the adequacy of service, Plaintiffs are ORDERED TO SHOW CAUSE as follows.

DISCUSSION

“A federal court does not have jurisdiction over a defendant unless the defendant has been 

served properly under Fed. R. Civ. P. 4.” Direct Mail Specialists, Inc. v. Eclat Computerized 

Techs., Inc., 840 F.2d 685, 688 (9th Cir. 1988). Service on a corporation may be made by 

delivering a copy of the summons and complaint in accordance with state law where the district 

court is located. See Fed. R. Civ. Proc. 4(e)(1) & 4(h)(1)(A). California law states that service on 

a corporation may be made by serving “the person designated as agent for service of process.” 

Cal. Civ. Proc. Code § 416.10(a). Service may be completed by personal service, Cal. Civ. Proc. 

Code § 415.10, or by leaving the summons and complaint “during usual office hours in [the 

Case 3:18-cv-05411-JSC Document 28 Filed 06/14/19 Page 1 of 3
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

person’s] office or, if no physical address is known, at his or her usual mailing address... with the 

person who is apparently in charge thereof, and by thereafter mailing a copy of the summons and 

complaint by first-class mail, postage prepaid to the person to be served at the place where a copy 

of the summons and complaint were left,” Cal. Civ. Proc. Code § 415.20(a). 

Here, the summons listed Defendant’s name and address as “AG-TECH INC., a California 

Corporation; c/o Jordan L. Henne, Agent for Service of Process; 925 Timbell Rd.; Waterford, CA 

95386” (the “Timbell Road” address). (Dkt. No. 6.) Additionally, the California Secretary of 

State website gives Defendant’s agent as Jordan L. Henne and the address for service of process as 

the Timbell address. See Business Search – Entity Detail, CALIFORNIA SECRETARY OF STATE,

https://businesssearch.sos.ca.gov/ (select “Corporation Name” search type and search “ag-tech”) 

(last visited June 10, 2019). However, the Proof of Service states that the Complaint and 

Summons were served on Ag-Tech’s agent for service of process, Jordan Henne, by substituted 

service by leaving copies with Kristina Henne, wife of the agent for service, at 5476 Greenoaks 

Drive, Riverbank, CA 95367 (the “Greenoaks Drive” address) as well as by mail at the same 

address. (Dkt. No. 11 at 2, 4.) 

Plaintiff’s motion for default judgment does not address (1) that Defendant was served at a 

different address than the one identified for the agent for service of process, or that (2) substituted 

service was made on the wife of the agent for service of process. While substituted service may 

be proper, “Plaintiffs must [] be reasonably diligent in their attempts at direct service before 

substitute service is permitted.” Hong-Ming Lu v. Primax Wheel Corp., No. C 04-4170 JSW, 

2005 WL 807048, at *3 (N.D. Cal. Apr. 7, 2005). Plaintiffs have provided no information 

regarding what efforts were made to serve Defendant prior to making substituted service. See

Aussieker v. M&S Green-Power Energy, Inc., No. 2:18-cv-03234-JAM-AC, 2019 WL 2183783, at 

*4 (E.D. Cal. May 21, 2019) (recommending denial of motion for default judgment because 

plaintiffs did not attempt personal service two or three times before using substitute service). Nor 

have Plaintiffs shown that the Greenoaks Drive address is an office address as required by Cal. 

Civ. Proc. Code § 415.20(a). See Gambord v. Westside Gas, Inc., No. 17-cv-00262-BLF, 2017 

WL 2774408, at *3 (N.D. Cal. June 26, 2017) (finding that substituted service by leaving the 

Case 3:18-cv-05411-JSC Document 28 Filed 06/14/19 Page 2 of 3
3

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

summons and complaint with the agent’s wife at their residence would be ineffective because the 

agent’s address is not defendant business’s address). The California Code of Civil Procedure 

allows service by leaving a copy of the summons and complaint at the person’s dwelling, but only 

in particular circumstances, which are not present here. See Cal. Civ. Proc. Code § 415.20(b); see 

also Cal. Civ. Proc. Code §§ 416.60, 416.70, 416.80, 416.90. 

Accordingly, Plaintiffs are ORDERED TO SHOW CAUSE regarding the adequacy of 

service. In particular, Plaintiffs shall file a written response to this Order by June 27, 2019. The 

June 27, 2019 hearing on Plaintiff’s motion for default judgment is VACATED. The Court will 

take the motion under submission upon receipt of the order to show cause response.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: June 14, 2019

JACQUELINE SCOTT CORLEY

United States Magistrate Judge

Case 3:18-cv-05411-JSC Document 28 Filed 06/14/19 Page 3 of 3