Freshko Produce Services, Inc. v. ILA Products, Inc., 1:19-cv-00017

Plaintiff Freshko filed a PACA-based complaint naming ILA Products, HFN CA, Jamie Gibson, and Kathy Gibson on January 4, 2019.
Plaintiff filed proofs of service showing personal service on Jamie Gibson (identified on ILA’s Statement of Information as ILA’s agent/officer) at 550 W. Cienega Ave #C, San Dimas, CA.
Clerk entered defaults; defaults as to Jamie and Kathy Gibson were later set aside after they appeared pro se; ILA never appeared and did not sign settlement stipulations.
Secretary of State records showed ILA’s agent resigned on October 5, 2018 and the corporation is listed as suspended; Statement of Information lists Gibson and Ron De Silva as officers.
Plaintiff moved ex parte for an order to serve ILA via the California Secretary of State under Cal. Corp. Code § 1702, supported by counsel’s declaration describing service attempts and public-records searches.
The magistrate judge denied the application without prejudice, concluding Plaintiff failed to demonstrate reasonable diligence in attempting service on ILA’s officers and at other possible addresses.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether service on ILA via the CA Secretary of State under Corp. Code § 1702 is authorized	Service on Gibson (per Statement of Information) and subsequent searches show agent resigned/unlocatable; therefore § 1702 relief is proper	ILA (through Gibson’s statements) contests that Gibson is/was an officer/agent and ILA has other officers/addresses not shown to be searched	Denied: § 1702 requires proof both that agent resigned/can't be found and that plaintiff exercised reasonable diligence to serve officers/other methods; second requirement not satisfied
Whether Plaintiff exercised the "reasonable diligence" required by CCP §§ 415/416 and Corp. Code § 1702	Plaintiff made good-faith efforts: served Gibson, used Secretary of State records, and ran public-records searches identifying multiple addresses	Gibson denied being an officer; plaintiff did not show attempts to locate/serve other listed officer (Ron De Silva) or at one identified address (1173 N. Dixie Dr.), nor other diligent searches	Denied: plaintiff failed to show a thorough, systematic effort to locate officers or attempt service at all identified addresses; therefore § 1702 service not authorized at this time

Donel, Inc. v. Badalian, 87 Cal.App.3d 327 (Cal. Ct. App. 1978) (defines "reasonable diligence" as steps a reasonable person who truly desires to give notice would take)
Kott v. Superior Court, 45 Cal.App.4th 1126 (Cal. Ct. App. 1996) (interprets "reasonable diligence" to require a thorough, systematic investigation and inquiry)