United States District Court, S.D. Florida, Miami Division
ORDER DENYING DEFENDANTS' MOTIONS TO
FEDERICO A. MORENO UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
CAUSE came before the Court upon Defendants' Motions to
Dismiss the Complaint for Insufficient Service of Process
(D.E. 6-7), filed on October 9. 2017.
COURT has considered the motions, the pertinent portions of
the record, and being otherwise fully advised in the
premises, it is
that the motions are DENIED.
September 1, 2017, Plaintiff APL Microscopic, LLC filed a
copyright infringement suit against Defendants Corporate
American Solutions, LLC and Cariola Group, LLC. Defendants
subsequently moved to dismiss the Complaint based on
insufficient service of process. After challenging Plaintiffs
service-and, in turn, the Court's personal jurisdiction
over Defendants-Defendants immediately filed an Answer
admitting that (i) "Defendants are subject to personal
jurisdiction in Florida, " and (ii) "[v]enue is
proper in this district under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1391(b)
and (c) and 1400(a) because Defendants reside in this
district, and Defendants are subject to personal jurisdiction
in this district." (Ans. 111113-14 (admitting
allegations in Compl. 111113-14).)
American Solutions and Cariola Group operate as limited
liability companies under the laws of Florida. Mariano J.
Cariola is the registered agent for both Defendants. Notably,
Corporate American Solutions, Cariola Group, and Mr. Cariola
share the same address: 7255 NW. Corporate Drive, Suite E,
Miami FL, 33126.
hired Majestic Process to serve Defendants. On Monday,
September 18, 2017, Majestic delivered a copy of the summons
and complaint to Mercedes Perez-Mr. Cariola's
administrative assistant-at the Corporate Drive address
argues that Majestic did not effectuate service of process
because (i) Mr. Cariola was away from the office when
Majestic delivered the summons and complaint, and (ii)
Mercedes Perez was not authorized to receive any documents on
behalf of Mr. Cariola.
service of process is insufficient, a district court lacks
personal jurisdiction over the defendant. Kelly v. State
of Florida,233 Fed.Appx. 883, 884 (11th Cir. 2007).
Courts require "strict compliance with service of
process procedures." Baraban v. Sussman, 439
So.2d 1046, 1047 (Fla. 4th DCA 1983) ...