Othman vs. Monetiva Inc.

Here, Plaintiff purported to serve Defendant EndlessOne in Nevada. (See ROA #19.)

Nevada Revised Statutes section 14.030 provides that when a corporation fails to appoint a registered agent, “Plaintiff must first file an affidavit ‘setting forth the facts, showing that due diligence has been used to ascertain the whereabouts of the officers of the artificial person to be served, and the facts showing that direct or personal service on, or notice to, the artificial person cannot be had.’” (LG Capital Funding, LLC v. Worthington Energy, Inc. (E.D.N.Y., Feb. 20, 2018, No. 16CV6288NGGST) 2018 WL 1370266, at p. *3, quoting Nev. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 14.030(3).)

After filing the affidavit, Plaintiff must provide the Nevada Secretary of State with: “(1) a certificate of Nevada's Secretary of State showing a failure to appoint a registered agent; (2) a payment of a $10 fee; and (3) a copy of the legal process service with a citation to the relevant statute.” (Ibid., citing Nev. Rev. State. Ann. § 14.030(1).)

Once a plaintiff has served the Secretary of State in this manner, “Plaintiff must also mail the documents to the last known address of the corporation or one of its officers, if known, by registered or certified mail.” (Ibid., citing Nev. Rev. State. Ann. § 14.030(4).)

Here, Plaintiff presents evidence that Defendant EndlessOne’s registered agent for service of process resigned on September 26, 2022, and that Defendant EndlessOne did not thereafter designate a new registered agent as required by Nevada Revised Statutes section 14.020. (See Decl. of Michelle J. Correll (Correll Decl.), ¶¶ 2-3, Exh.s 1-2.)

Nevada Secretary of State records identify Najwa Karkaji and Nabil Bader as Defendant EndlessOne’s last-named officers. (See id., ¶ 2, Exh. 1; Decl. of George Franco (Franco Decl.), ¶ 2.)

Plaintiff submitted declarations indicating that Plaintiff unsuccessfully attempted to locate and personally serve Karkaji and Bader. (See Correll Decl., ¶¶ 5-6, Exh. 3; Franco Decl., ¶¶ 3-4.)

Plaintiff also filed an affidavit of due diligence pursuant to Nevada Revised Statutes section 14.030, stating that Plaintiff attempted to locate and personally serve Karkaji and Bader but was unsuccessful. (See ROA #12; Correl Decl., ¶ 7, Exh. 4.)

On December 4, 2025, Plaintiff served the Summons and Complaint on Defendant EndlessOne by delivering a copy to the Nevada Secretary of State. (See id., ¶ 8, Exh. 5.)

Plaintiff also mailed copies of the Summons and Complaint to Defendant EndlessOne, Karkaji, and Bader at their last-know addresses. (See ROA #21; Correll Decl., ¶ 9, Exh. 6.)

However, Plaintiff did not present evidence that Plaintiff had served on the Nevada Secretary of State a certificate showing Defendant EndlessOne’s failure to appoint a registered agent or failure to file a statement of change of registered agent or that Plaintiff made the required payment of the $10 fee. (See id., ¶ 8, Exh. 5.)

Therefore, Plaintiff has not established compliance with Nevada Revised Statute section 14.030 and the court cannot grant the motion to confirm validity of the service effectuated on December 4, 2025.

Order to Serve Nevada or California Secretary of State

In the alternative, Plaintiff seeks an order allowing service on the Nevada Secretary of State or the California Secretary of State.

Here, Nevada Revised Statute section 14.030 does not appear to require a prior court order to effectuate service pursuant to its provisions.

However, California Corporations Code section 2111 provides that:

If the agent designated for the service of process is a natural person and cannot be found with due diligence at the address stated in the designation or if the agent is a corporation and no person can be found with due diligence to whom the delivery authorized by Section 2110 may be made for the purpose of delivery to the corporate agent, or if the agent designated is no longer authorized to act, or if no agent has been designated and if no one of the officers or agents of the corporation specified in Section 2110 can be found after diligent search and it is so shown by affidavit to the satisfaction of the court, then the court may make an order that service be made by personal delivery to the Secretary of State or to an assistant or deputy secretary of state of two copies of the process together with two copies of the order, except that if the corporation to be served has not filed the statement required to be filed by Section 2105 then only one copy of the process and order need be delivered but the order shall include and set forth an address to which the process shall be sent by the Secretary of State.

(Corp. Code, § 2111, subd. (a).) (fn.1)

(fn.1) Corporations Code section 2110 controls service of process upon a foreign corporation so that it is implied that Corporations Code section

2111 also applies to foreign corporations. There is a provision that is analogous to Section 2111 that applies to domestic corporations. (See Corp. Code, § 1702.)

Here, Plaintiff has shown that “the agent designated is no longer authorized to act” and that “no agent has been designated and [] no one of the officers or agents of the corporation specified in Section 2110 can be found after diligent search.” (Corp. Code, § 2111, subd. (a).)

Plaintiff has also presented evidence that Defendant EndlessOne has not made the statement required by Corporations Code section 2105. (See Correll Decl., ¶ 4.)

Therefore, the court will order that service be effectuated by personal delivery to the California Secretary of State or to an assistant or deputy secretary of state of one copy of the process and order.

Plaintiff shall give notice of this ruling.

5 Navarro vs. Abdo Motion to Be Relieved as Counsel

Counsel Marc P. Grismer, Esq.’s Motion to Be 30-2022-01287775 Relieved as Counsel for Plaintiff Miguel A. Navarro is GRANTED.

Counsel Marc P. Grismer, Esq. is ORDERED to submit to this court a proposed Order Granting Attorney’s Motion to Be Relieved as Counsel – Civil (Form MC-053), that is completely and correctly completed, within 10 days of this ruling.

Within 15 days of receiving the signed Form MC- 053 back from the court, Counsel Marc P. Grismer, Esq. is ORDERED to serve Plaintiff Miguel A. Navarro with the signed Form MC-053 and notice of this ruling, in the manner described in Rules of Court rule 3.1362(d).

Counsel Marc P. Grismer, Esq. shall be relieved as counsel of record for Plaintiff Miguel A. Navarro effective upon the filing of a proof of service showing timely service of the signed Form MC-053 and notice of this ruling.

Pending Motion