Akzo Nobel Coatings Inc. v. GMP Cars, LLC
- Yvonne Rogers
- 4:21-cv-03359
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 3
In Akzo Nobel v. GMP Cars, Judge Rogers authorized newspaper service on GMP Cars and gave Akzo Nobel 50 days to complete it.
Akzo Nobel Coatings Inc. received permission to serve GMP Cars, LLC by publication and additional time to complete service. GMP Cars, LLC is the defendant to be served. The opinion does not state that the order resolved the claims against GMP Cars or Geoffrey M. Palermo.
What happened
In Akzo Nobel Coatings Inc. v. GMP Cars, LLC, Akzo Nobel asked to serve GMP Cars by publishing the summons in a newspaper after earlier attempts to obtain that permission were denied.
The court found that Akzo Nobel had made sufficiently thorough efforts to locate and serve GMP Cars. It also found evidence that GMP Cars had breached contracts by not repaying advances after failing to make the required level of paint purchases. The court approved publication in the Marin Scope, which it found was the appropriate newspaper.
The court granted Akzo Nobel’s renewed application. Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers ordered Akzo Nobel to publish the summons for four consecutive weeks and complete service within 50 days of the order, then file proof of service within 14 days after publication ended.
The detailed version
- Akzo Nobel Coatings Inc. v. GMP Cars, LLC · No. 4:21-cv-03359
- Yvonne Rogers
- Sept. 17, 2021
Background
Akzo Nobel Coatings Inc. filed a second application asking the court to authorize service of process on GMP Cars, LLC by publication and to extend the time for completing that service. The court had denied Akzo Nobel’s first application because it had not provided enough evidence that a legal claim existed or shown that its proposed newspaper was most likely to give GMP Cars notice.
Court’s Analysis
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4 allows service under the law of the state where the federal court is located or where service occurs. California law permits service by publication when the defendant cannot, with reasonable diligence, be served by another permitted method. The court found that a declaration from Akzo Nobel’s counsel sufficiently described the efforts made to locate and serve GMP Cars.
California law also requires evidence that a cause of action exists against the defendant. A declaration from Akzo Nobel’s district sales leader attached the contracts at issue and stated that GMP Cars breached them by failing to repay advances after failing to make the required level of paint purchases. The court found this evidence sufficient.
The court further found that the Marin Scope was an appropriate newspaper because counsel stated that it was the only newspaper on the Marin County Superior Court’s list of legally authorized newspapers circulated in Novato, where GMP Cars was located.
Order
The court granted Akzo Nobel’s renewed application to serve GMP Cars by publication. Akzo Nobel was required to publish the summons in the Marin Scope once a week for four consecutive weeks, following California’s publication requirements, and to perfect service within 50 days of the order. If Akzo Nobel found a proper service address before publication ended, it was required to serve GMP Cars with the summons, complaint, and order instead. Akzo Nobel also had to file proof of service within 14 days after publication was completed. The order terminated Docket Number 16.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.