Summary
acknowledging that some of plaintiff's attempts at service failed due to “forces out of Plaintiff's control, i.e., Defendant's remote workforce during a global pandemic,” but concluding that plaintiff did not establish good faith for failure to timely serve defendant because plaintiff “offered no rationale for its inaction for more than four months following its initial attempt at service.”
Summary of this case from Staretz v. Walmart Stores E.Opinion
3:20-CV-02015
10-31-2022
GOLD LINE, INC. d/b/a GOLD LINE TRAILWAYS Plaintiff, v. OURBUS, INC. Defendant.
ORDER
ROBERT D. MARIANI UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
AND NOW, THIS 31st DAY OF OCTOBER 2022, upon consideration of Defendant's “Motion of Defendant Ourbus, Inc. to Dismiss the Plaintiff's Amended Complaint for Insufficient Service, Lack of Personal Jurisdiction and Improper Venue, or in the Alternative, a Motion to Transfer the Case to the Southern District of New York,” (Doc. 17), and all documents relevant to such motion, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT:
1. Defendant's Motion to Dismiss the Amended Complaint for Insufficient Service, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(5), is DENIED.
2. Defendant's Motion to Dismiss the Amended Complaint for Lack of Personal Jurisdiction, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(2), is DENIED.
3. Defendant's Motion to Dismiss the Amended Complaint for Improper Venue, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(3), is DENIED.
4. Defendant's Motion to Transfer Venue to the Southern District of New York, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(3), is DENIED.