Castronuova v. Meta Platforms, Inc. et al
| Cara Castronuova |
| Meta Platforms, Inc., X Corp, Vivek Murthy and Joseph R. Biden, Jr. |
| 3:2024cv02523 |
| April 26, 2024 |
| US District Court for the Northern District of California |
| Peter H Kang |
| Civil Rights: Other |
| 42 U.S.C. § 1981 Civil Rights |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on April 26, 2024. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 39 Initial Case Management Scheduling Order with ADR Deadlines: Case Management Statement due by 7/18/2024. Initial Case Management Conference set for 7/25/2024 10:30 AM in San Francisco, Courtroom F, 15th Floor. (dhm, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 4/26/2024) |
| Filing 38 Case transferred in from District of New York Eastern; Case Number 2:23-cv-07511. Original file certified copy of transfer order and docket sheet received. |
| Case transferred to District of Northern District of California. Original file, certified copy of transfer order, and docket sheet sent. ALL FILINGS ARE TO BE MADE IN THE TRANSFER COURT, DO NOT DOCKET TO THIS CASE. (JT) |
Filing 37
ORDER granting #31 Defendant Meta's Motion to Change Venue; granting #35 Defendant X Corp.'s Motion to Change Venue. For the reasons stated in the attached Memorandum and Order, Defendants Meta and X Corp.'s motions to transfer venue are GRANTED, and Plaintiff's action is DISMISSED without prejudice against Defendants Biden and Murthy for failure to serve either defendant within 90 days as required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(m). The Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to terminate Defendants Biden and Murthy, and transfer this case to the Northern District of California. Ordered by Judge Kiyo A. Matsumoto on 4/15/2024. (SP)
|
| Filing 36 Letter re Plaintiff's Non-Opposition to Defendant X Corp.'s Motion to Transfer Venue by X Corp. (Holtzblatt, Ari) |
| Filing 35 MOTION to Change Venue by X Corp.. (Attachments: #1 Memorandum in Support, #2 Declaration of Emily Barnet in Support, #3 Exhibit A, #4 Exhibit B, #5 Exhibit C, #6 Exhibit D, #7 Exhibit E, #8 Exhibit F, #9 Exhibit G, #10 Exhibit H, #11 Exhibit I, #12 Exhibit J, #13 Exhibit K) (Holtzblatt, Ari) |
| Filing 34 Letter re Motion Package for Defendant X Corp.'s Motion to Transfer Venue by X Corp. (Holtzblatt, Ari) |
| Filing 33 Letter re Filing of Motion to Change Venue by Meta Platforms, Inc. (Simons, Caroline) |
| Filing 32 REPLY in Support re #31 MOTION to Change Venue filed by Meta Platforms, Inc.. (Simons, Caroline) |
| Filing 31 MOTION to Change Venue by Meta Platforms, Inc.. (Attachments: #1 Memorandum in Support of Motion to Change Venue, #2 Declaration of Jennifer Pricer in Support, #3 Exhibit A, #4 Exhibit B) (Simons, Caroline) |
| Filing 30 Letter pursuant to Order by Cara Castronuova (Attachments: #1 Exhibit Mail Receipt, #2 Exhibit Mail Receipt, #3 Exhibit Receipt, #4 Exhibit Delivery Confirmation, #5 Exhibit Mail Receipt, #6 Exhibit Delivery Confirmation) (Freeth, Richard) |
|
The Court is in receipt of Plaintiffs' apparent response to the Order to Show Cause, which consists of the affidavits of service #26 #27 #28 #29 on each of the Defendants in the instant case. Plaintiff filed no further response and offered no further explanation for her failure to provide proof of service in a timely manner. The Court assumes that Plaintiff's argument is that the case should not be dismissed pursuant to Rule 4(m) because the Defendants were properly served in a timely manner, in the absence of any further explanation being proffered.Plaintiff's process servers attest generally that they served individuals "designated by law to accept service of process on behalf of [the Meta and X Corp Defendants]" on November 16 and 17, 2023, respectively. Plaintiff does not specify how this service fulfills the requirements of Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(h), or whether service was made consistent with New York or California state law, but the Court assumes that service was proper for purposes of the Order to Show Cause. This does not constitute a finding regarding service or otherwise have bearing on Defendants' ability to challenge service under Fed. R. Civ. P. 12.As regards the United States Defendants, Plaintiff's process server states that he "[s]erved [the] Civil Process Clerk for the US Attorney via Certified Mail" and also served the Attorney General and individual officers in each case. Such manner of service is not inconsistent with Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(i)(1)(A)(ii), which allows for service by certified or registered mail on the civil-process clerk at the United States attorney's office as an alternative to personal service. Plaintiff's process server fails to state exactly which US Attorney's civil process clerk was served via Certified Mail - under Rule 4(i)(1), the civil process clerk for "the United States attorney or the district where the action is brought" would be the appropriate recipient - in this case, the Eastern District of New York. Plaintiff is ORDERED to supplement the response to the Order to Show Cause by filing on the docket 1) a letter to the Court from Plaintiff's counsel explaining why service on the Surgeon General and President was proper; and (2) documentary evidence in support, including, but not limited to, the certified mail receipts showing the addresses to which each copy of the summons and complaint were mailed. Plaintiff's response is due by April 8, 2024. Ordered by Judge Kiyo A. Matsumoto on 4/1/2024. (SP)
|
| Filing 29 SUMMONS Returned Executed by Cara Castronuova. Vivek Murthy served on 11/15/2023, answer due 12/6/2023. (Freeth, Richard) |
| Filing 28 SUMMONS Returned Executed by Cara Castronuova. Joseph R. Biden, Jr served on 11/15/2023, answer due 12/6/2023. (Freeth, Richard) |
| Filing 27 SUMMONS Returned Executed by Cara Castronuova. X Corp. served on 11/17/2023, answer due 12/8/2023. (Freeth, Richard) |
| Filing 26 SUMMONS Returned Executed by Cara Castronuova. Meta Platforms, Inc. served on 11/22/2023, answer due 12/13/2023. (Freeth, Richard) |
| Filing 25 MEMORANDUM in Opposition re Order on Motion for Pre Motion Conference,,, #24 Letter, #23 Letter filed by Cara Castronuova. (Freeth, Richard) |
|
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE: The Complaint was filed on October 7, 2023, (ECF No. 1), and, after failing to respond to requests from the Clerk's Office, Plaintiff eventually provided proposed summons on October 27, 2023, (ECF No. 5), and the Clerk of Court issued summons on October 30, 2023, (ECF Nos. 6-9). Plaintiff has, as of the date of this order, failed to provide proof of service of the summons and complaint upon any Defendant, including Defendants Meta Platforms, Inc., and X Corp., both of whom have nonetheless appeared. Rule 4(m) of Federal Rules of Civil Procedure provides that "[i]f a defendant is not served within 90 days after the complaint is filed, the court--on motion or on its own after notice to the plaintiff--must dismiss the action without prejudice against that defendant or order that service be made within a specified time." Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(m). "But if the plaintiff shows good cause for the failure, the court must extend the time for service[.]" Id. "To establish good cause, a plaintiff must demonstrate that despite diligent attempts, service could not be made due to exceptional circumstances beyond his or her control." Deptula v. Rosen, 558 F. Supp. 3d 73, 85 (S.D.N.Y. 2021) (internal quotation marks and citation omitted). "Attorney error does not constitute good cause under Rule 4(m)." Counter Terrorist Grp. U.S. v. New York Mag., 374 F. App'x 233, 235 (2d Cir. 2010). "Similarly, good cause does not exist where the plaintiff, upon learning that a defendant was not properly served, fails either to serve that defendant again within the time remaining under Rule 4(m) or to seek additional time within which to do so." Deptula, 558 F. Supp. 3d at 85.Plaintiff is directed to show cause by March 29, 2024, why this case should not be dismissed without prejudice against all Defendants for whom the docket lacks proof of service of process because Plaintiff has failed to serve defendants in accordance with Rule 4(m). Plaintiff is further directed to file on the docket proof of service within the 90 day time limit if service was indeed properly made. Ordered by Judge Kiyo A. Matsumoto on 3/22/2024. (SP)
|
|
ORDER OF RECUSAL. Judge Nusrat Jahan Choudhury recused. Case reassigned to Judge Kiyo A. Matsumoto for all further proceedings. Ordered by Judge Nusrat Jahan Choudhury on 3/18/2024. (BMM)
|
| Filing 24 Letter re Defendant X Corp.'s Service of its Motion to Transfer Venue by X Corp. (Holtzblatt, Ari) |
| Filing 23 Letter re Defendant Meta Platforms, Inc.'s Service of its Motion to Transfer Venue by Meta Platforms, Inc. (Simons, Caroline) |
|
ORDER: In light of the Court's Order setting a briefing schedule for Defendants' anticipated motion to transfer venue, Defendants' Letter Motions requesting a pre motion conference (ECF Nos. 20, 21) are denied. See Elec. Order, Feb. 13, 2024. Ordered by Judge Nusrat J. Choudhury on 2/13/2024. (NB)
|
|
ORDER: The Court has reviewed the parties' correspondence concerning Defendants' anticipated motions to transfer venue under Rule 12(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, (ECF Nos. 20, 21, 22.) The Court waives the pre-motion conference requirement as the Court finds that a pre-motion conference is not necessary at this time. The parties shall comply with the following briefing schedule: Defendants shall serve on Plaintiff any motions to transfer venue by March 4, 2024. Plaintiff shall serve on Defendant its opposition by March 25, 2024. Defendants' replies, if any, shall be served on Plaintiff by April 8, 2024. The parties must consult and comply with the Court's Individual Rules, including the Court's recommended bundling practice. See Individual Rule 5.2.6. Consequently, all briefing shall be filed with the court no later than April 8, 2024. Ordered by Judge Nusrat J. Choudhury on 2/13/2024. (NB)
|
| Filing 22 Letter Response in opposition to Defendants intention to transfer case by Cara Castronuova (Freeth, Richard) |
|
ORDER. Plaintiff shall respond by February 1, 2024 to the letter motions by Defendants Meta Platforms, Inc., ECF No. #20 , and X Corp., ECF No. #21 , requesting a pre-motion conference on anticipated motions to transfer venue to the Northern District of California. Ordered by Judge Nusrat J. Choudhury on 1/25/2024. (ASB)
|
| Filing 21 Letter MOTION for pre motion conference for Motion to Transfer this Case to the Northern District of California by X Corp.. (Holtzblatt, Ari) |
| Filing 20 Letter MOTION for pre motion conference in connection with Meta's anticipated motion to transfer venue to the Northern District of California by Meta Platforms, Inc.. (Simons, Caroline) |
| Filing 19 Joint MOTION to Adjourn Conference by X Corp.. (Holtzblatt, Ari) |
|
ORDER granting #19 Motion to Adjourn Conference. Upon counsels' request, and in light of the forthcoming motion to transfer venue, the initial conference scheduled for February 12, 2024 is CANCELLED. So Ordered by Magistrate Judge Anne Y. Shields on 1/17/2024. (DM)
|
|
ORDER granting #18 Motion for Extension of Time to File. Defendant Meta Platforms Inc.'s request to extend the time to file its pre-motion letter to dismiss until after a decision on the forthcoming motion to transfer venue is issued is GRANTED. Meta's time to file the pre-motion letter to dismiss is EXTENDED until 28 days after either the case is transferred or the motion to transfer venue or leave to file such a motion is denied. Meta shall file its pre-motion letter to transfer venue by January 24, 2024. So Ordered by Magistrate Judge Anne Y. Shields on 12/12/2023. (DM)
|
| Filing 18 Letter MOTION for Extension of Time to File Pre-Motion Letter in connection with Meta's anticipated Motion to Dismiss the complaint by Meta Platforms, Inc.. (Simons, Caroline) |
| Filing 17 NOTICE of Appearance by Caroline Koo Simons on behalf of Meta Platforms, Inc. (aty to be noticed) (Simons, Caroline) |
| Filing 16 NOTICE of Appearance by Brian Jeffrey Wegrzyn on behalf of Meta Platforms, Inc. (aty to be noticed) (Wegrzyn, Brian) |
| Filing 15 NOTICE of Appearance by Emily Barnet on behalf of X Corp. (notification declined or already on case) (Barnet, Emily) |
| Filing 14 NOTICE of Appearance by Ari Holtzblatt on behalf of X Corp. (notification declined or already on case) (Holtzblatt, Ari) |
|
ORDER granting #11 Motion for Leave to Appear Pro Hac Vice; granting #12 Motion for Leave to Appear Pro Hac Vice. The attorneys shall register for ECF, registration is available online at www.pacer.gov. Once registered, the attorneys shall file a notice of appearance and ensure that they receive electronic notification of activity in this case. So Ordered by Magistrate Judge Anne Y. Shields on 12/7/2023. (DM)
|
|
ORDER granting #13 Motion for Extension of Time to File. Defendant X Corp.'s request to extend the time to file its pre-motion letter to dismiss until after a decision on the forthcoming motion to transfer venue is issued is GRANTED. X Corp.'s time to file the pre-motion letter to dismiss is EXTENDED until 28 days after either the case is transferred or the motion to transfer venue or leave to file such a motion is denied. X Corp. shall file its pre-motion letter to transfer venue by January 24, 2024. So Ordered by Magistrate Judge Anne Y. Shields on 12/7/2023. (DM)
|
| Filing 13 Letter MOTION for Extension of Time to File a Pre-Motion Letter Requesting Leave to File a Motion to Dismiss the Complaint by X Corp.. (Holtzblatt, Ari) |
| Filing 12 MOTION to Appear Pro Hac Vice Filing fee $ 150, receipt number ANYEDC-17352317 by X Corp.. (Attachments: #1 Affidavit of Emily J. Barnet in Support of, #2 Certificate of Good Standing - New York) (Barnet, Emily) |
| Filing 11 MOTION to Appear Pro Hac Vice Filing fee $ 150, receipt number ANYEDC-17352084 by X Corp.. (Attachments: #1 Affidavit of Ari Holtzblatt in Support of, #2 Certificate of Good Standing - Maryland, #3 Certificate of Good Standing - D.C., #4 Exhibit A) (Holtzblatt, Ari) |
|
Filing 10
ORDER: An IN-PERSON Initial Conference is set for 2/12/2024 at 11:30 AM in Courtroom 840 before Magistrate Judge Anne Y. Shields. See order and attachment.Ordered by Magistrate Judge Anne Y. Shields on 10/30/2023. (Attachments: #1 AYS RULES) (JT)
|
| Filing 9 Summons Issued as to Joseph R. Biden, Jr, U.S. Attorney and U.S. Attorney General. (AMF) |
| Filing 8 Summons Issued as to Vivek Murthy, U.S. Attorney and U.S. Attorney General. (AMF) |
| Filing 7 Summons Issued as to X Corp. (AMF) |
| Filing 6 Summons Issued as to Meta Platforms, Inc.. (AMF) |
| Filing 5 Proposed Summons. Re #1 Complaint, by Cara Castronuova (Attachments: #1 Proposed Summons, #2 Proposed Summons, #3 Proposed Summons) (Freeth, Richard) |
| Filing 4 Clerk's Notice Re: Consent. A United States Magistrate Judge has been assigned to this case and is available to conduct all proceedings. In accordance with Rule 73 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Local Rule 73.1, the parties are notified that if all parties consent, the assigned Magistrate Judge is available to conduct all proceedings in this action including a (jury or nonjury) trial and to order the entry of a final judgment. Attached to this Notice is a blank copy of the consent form that should be filled out, signed and filed electronically only if all parties wish to consent. Any party may withhold its consent without adverse substantive consequences. Do NOT return or file the consent unless all parties have signed the consent.The form may also be accessed at the following link: #https://img.nyed.uscourts.gov/files/forms/MJConsentForm.pdf (CL) |
| Filing 3 This attorney case opening filing has been checked for quality control. See the attachment for corrections that were made, if any. (KD) |
| Filing 2 Civil Cover Sheet.. by Cara Castronuova (Freeth, Richard) |
| Your proposed summons was not issued for one of the following reasons: No summons provided, please submit summons. The event can be found under the event Other Documents - Proposed Summons/Civil Cover Sheet., Please correct and resubmit using Proposed Summons/Civil Cover Sheet. (CL) |
| Case Assigned to Judge Nusrat Jahan Choudhury and Magistrate Judge Anne Y. Shields. Please download and review the Individual Practices of the assigned Judges, located on our #website. Attorneys are responsible for providing courtesy copies to judges where their Individual Practices require such. (CL) |
| NOTICE : The Clerks Office is awaiting the completed Civil Cover Sheet so that this case may be processed. If in 30 days of the filing date (11/6/2023), we do not receive the completed and needed form, this case will be administratively closed. (KD) |
| FINAL NOTICE! Re: Incomplete Civil Cover Sheet. The Clerk's Office cannot assign this case without a completed 2 Page Form Civil Cover Sheet. Please submit a completed Civil Cover Sheet. This event can be found under the event Other Documents - Proposed Summons/Civil Cover Sheet. (KD) |
| Notice: Re: Incomplete Civil Cover Sheet. The Clerk's Office cannot assign this case without a completed 2 Page Civil Cover Sheet. Please submit a completed Civil Cover Sheet. This event can be found under the event Other Documents - Proposed Summons/Civil Cover Sheet. (KD) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT against Meta Platforms, Inc., X Corp., Vivek Murthy, Joseph R. Biden, Jr filing fee $ 402, receipt number ANYEDC-17161429 Was the Disclosure Statement on Civil Cover Sheet completed -no,, filed by Cara Castronuova. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit Exhibit screenshots, #2 Exhibit Exhibit screenshots, #3 Exhibit Exhibit screenshots, #4 Exhibit Article, #5 Exhibit Evidence re internal doc, #6 Supplement Court ordered disclosure) (Freeth, Richard) |
Access additional case information on PACER
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the California Northern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
