Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
Back to docket
N.D. Cal.Procedural orderFiled Aug. 6, 2024

GS Holistic, LLC v. Masoud

Judge
Haywood Gilliam
Docket
4:22-cv-07637
Court
U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
Pages
3
Civil ProcedureIntellectual Property
In one sentence

In GS Holistic v. Masoud, Judge Tse ordered more briefing before deciding default judgment, focusing on service and business connections.

Who this affects

GS Holistic, LLC must provide additional briefing and proof of service before its motion for default judgment against Basel Masoud can be decided. Masoud remains the only defendant identified as remaining in the case.

What happened

GS Holistic, LLC asked for default judgment against Basel Masoud after Nadim Maida was voluntarily dismissed, leaving Masoud as the only defendant. The case involves an allegedly infringing glass infuser and questions about its connection to Hotbox Smoke Shop and Illusion Smoke Shop.

The court did not decide the request for default judgment. It asked GS Holistic to provide more information about whether Masoud was properly served and whether the pictured storefront and product purchase were connected to Masoud.

Judge Alex G. Tse ordered GS Holistic to submit a supplemental brief and proof of service by August 20, 2024. The order also said GS Holistic could request more time to complete service or seek permission to amend its complaint or default-judgment motion.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
GS Holistic, LLC v. Masoud · No. 4:22-cv-07637
Judge
Haywood Gilliam
Date
Aug. 6, 2024

Background

GS Holistic, LLC moved for default judgment on May 31, 2024. Its first amended complaint named Basel Masoud doing business as Hotbox Smoke Shop, Nadim Maida doing business as Hotbox Smoke Shop, Basel Masoud, and Nadim Maida as defendants. GS Holistic later voluntarily dismissed Nadim Maida, leaving Masoud as the only defendant. The court treated Masoud and “Basel Masoud d/b/a Hotbox Smoke Shop” as one individual because a fictitious business name does not create a separate legal entity.

GS Holistic alleged that a glass infuser was purchased from “HOTBOX SMOKE.” Its default-judgment materials included photographs of the product, an “Illusion Smoke Shop” storefront, and the interior of a store. The court noted that Illusion Smoke Shop, Inc. had originally been a defendant but was later voluntarily dismissed, and that Illusion was not mentioned in the amended complaint.

Service of process

The court explained that a federal court generally does not have authority over a defendant unless the defendant was properly served under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4. GS Holistic first attempted to serve Masoud at an address on Main Street in Watsonville on September 14, 2023, but the attempt was unsuccessful. After obtaining a report, GS Holistic made another unsuccessful attempt at an address in Freedom on October 15, 2023. On March 21, 2024, it used substitute service by serving Masoud’s wife, Flower Masoud, at an address on Green Valley Road in Watsonville.

The court asked GS Holistic to explain why the substitute service was proper. Under the federal service rule discussed by the court, service at a person’s home requires that the address be the person’s “dwelling or usual place of abode.” The court said it was unclear whether the Green Valley Road address met that requirement. If GS Holistic relied on California law instead, the court directed it to explain how service complied with that law.

Connection between the product, stores, and defendant

The court also ordered GS Holistic to clarify whether the pictured Illusion Smoke Shop storefront was connected to Masoud, Hotbox Smoke Shop, and the purchase of the glass infuser. The court sought a clear connection between the allegedly infringing product, the storefront, and Masoud.

Ruling and next steps

The court did not grant or deny the motion for default judgment. Instead, Judge Alex G. Tse ordered GS Holistic to submit a supplemental brief by August 20, 2024, addressing proper service and the connection among the product purchase, storefront, and defendant. GS Holistic was also required to serve Masoud with the order by a method reasonably calculated to provide actual notice and file proof of service by that date. The order allowed GS Holistic to request additional time to complete service or to seek leave to amend its complaint or default-judgment motion.

The authoritative version

Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.