DENNIS L. FETTERS VS EWATT INC.

Case Number: KC069019 Hearing Date: August 22, 2017 Dept: O

Fetters v. Ewatt Inc., et al. (KC069019)

Defendant Guocheng’s MOTION TO VACATE THE DEFAULT ENTERED ON 5/23/17

Respondent: Plaintiff Fetters

TENTATIVE RULING

Defendant Guocheng’s motion to vacate the default entered on 5/23/17 is GRANTED.

Defendant Guocheng moves to vacate the default entered on 5/23/17 per CC 473(d) and 418.10, or alternatively per CCP 473(b) on the grounds that service was not statutorily authorized; the causes of action do not relate to any activity with California; Defendant does not have the requisite minimum contact with California; and on the ground that court lacks personal jurisdiction.

Defendant’s motion to vacate appears to be three motions in one. Defendant seeks to quash improper service because the summons and complaint were not served by Hague Convention methods; this court lacks minimum contact and personal jurisdiction over Defendant; and Defendant seeks to set aside entry of default.

Defendant Guocheng attests that at all times relevant, including 2/19/17, the date stated on the proof of service, Defendant was domiciled in the City of Wuhan, Hubei Province, People’s Republic of China, with the intent to remain at this location. (Guocheng Decl., Par. 4.) Thus, substituted service on Defendant Guocheng on 2/19/17 by an unregistered process server was defective.

Plaintiff contends that Defendant made a general appearance when he filed a notice of removal in Federal Court in which he claimed was for the purpose of bringing an objection to service. However, that notice constitutes “a voluntary appearance in the federal court proceedings.” (Opposition, 7:9.) The case has now been remanded to state court, and it is unclear whether Defendant made any appearances. Plaintiff refers to documents filed in federal court, but this court is not privy to what documents were filed and the extent of Defendant’s participation in that federal matter.

Accordingly, motion is GRANTED. Entry of default is vacated, and Defendant is to be served by Hague Convention methods.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email
Copy the code below to your web site.
x 

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *