Bovier v. Bridgepoint Education, 3:17-cv-01052

Plaintiff Dr. Racquel S. Bovier sued Bridgepoint Education and multiple individual defendants and attempted service by overnight mail.
Defendants moved to quash service of summons under Rule 12(b)(5) and filed a first amended complaint; Plaintiff filed motions she styled as for default judgment and also opposed the motion to quash.
Defendants argued service was improper because Plaintiff did not comply with California Code of Civil Procedure § 415.30 (failed to include two notice/acknowledgment forms and a prepaid return envelope) and did not serve an authorized corporate agent under § 416.10.
Defendants timely filed a motion to quash on the day their response was due; Plaintiff sought default judgment and sanctions for an alleged late filing.
The Court granted Defendants’ motion to quash, directed Plaintiff to re-serve properly within 30 days, denied Plaintiff’s motion for default judgment and sanctions, and vacated the scheduled hearing.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether service by overnight mail complied with FRCP 4(e) and Cal. CCP § 415.30	Overnight mail plus postal return receipts sufficed to effect service	Mail service omitted two acknowledgement forms and prepaid return envelope required by § 415.30; postal receipts not a substitute	Service was defective under § 415.30; motion to quash granted
Whether Plaintiff served an authorized corporate agent or authorized individual under Cal. CCP § 416.10	Individual defendants/Bridgepoint staff accepted or were available to receive service	Plaintiff did not serve the corporation’s designated agent or persons listed in § 416.10; no evidence personal service attempted on proper agent	Service defective for failure to deliver to an authorized corporate agent; quash warranted
Whether default judgment is appropriate for alleged failure to timely respond	Defendants failed to timely respond; request for default and sanctions	Defendants timely filed a Rule 12 motion (to quash) within response period; no default	Default judgment and sanctions denied; no entry of default warranted
Whether sanctions or court-ordered mediation are appropriate before proper service	Plaintiff sought sanctions and mediation citing local rule violations	Defendants not late; not yet properly served so mediation premature	Requests denied; mediation inappropriate until service perfected

O'Brien v. R.J. O'Brien & Assocs., 998 F.2d 1394 (7th Cir. 1993) (objections to service must specify how service was defective)
Aetna Bus. Credit, Inc. v. Universal Decor & Interior Design, Inc., 635 F.2d 434 (5th Cir. 1981) (burden on the serving party to prove validity of service once challenged)
Brockmeyer v. May, 383 F.3d 798 (9th Cir. 2004) (district court has discretion to quash defective service or dismiss for failure to effect proper service)
Ramos v. Homeward Residential, Inc., 223 Cal. App. 4th 1434 (Cal. Ct. App. 2014) (the phrase “person to be served” in analogous statutes is precise; failure to identify proper recipient renders service defective)