Razavi v. Coti
- Beth Freeman
- 5:17-cv-04341
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 2
In Razavi v. Coti, Judge Freeman dismissed the action without prejudice after Razavi failed to respond to an order about serving the defendants.
Melina Razavi’s action against Carlos Coti and GEICO Insurance Company was dismissed without prejudice.
What happened
In Razavi v. Coti, the court had directed the U.S. Marshal to serve Carlos Coti and GEICO Insurance Company because Razavi was proceeding without paying the usual filing fees. The Marshal returned both summonses unserved because the defendants could not be located at the addresses Razavi provided.
The court then ordered Razavi to provide alternate service addresses or explain why the case should not be dismissed. Her response was due November 30, 2021, but she filed no response.
On December 10, 2021, Judge Beth Labson Freeman dismissed the action without prejudice because Razavi failed to respond to the order to show cause. The opinion does not address the underlying claims.
The detailed version
- Razavi v. Coti · No. 5:17-cv-04341
- Beth Freeman
- Dec. 10, 2021
Background
Melina Razavi sued Carlos Coti and GEICO Insurance Company. Because Razavi was proceeding in forma pauperis, meaning the court had authorized the U.S. Marshal to handle service of process, the court directed the Marshal to serve the defendants.
On November 2, 2021, the Marshal returned both summonses unexecuted, reporting that the defendants could not be located at the addresses Razavi had provided. On November 9, 2021, the court issued an order to show cause—an order requiring Razavi to explain why the case should not be dismissed. The court gave her 21 days to provide alternate addresses that would allow service or otherwise explain why dismissal was unwarranted. Her response was due November 30, 2021, and no response was filed.
Ruling
The court dismissed the action without prejudice. The dismissal was based on Razavi’s failure to respond to the order to show cause and provide information needed for service; the court did not decide the merits of her claims. The order was issued by Beth Labson Freeman, United States District Judge.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.