DecisionDepot
California legal research
All cases
CUD26682430·sf·Civil·Real Property / Housing
Hearing todayGRANTED in part

S. COLLIER GWIN VS. THE BUBLE LOUNGE SAN FRANCISCO, INC.

MOTION TO QUASH SERVICE OF SUMMONS OR STAY OR DISMISS

Hearing date
Aug 25, 2026
Department
501
Prevailing
Mixed

Motion type

Browse all Motion to Quash rulings statewide →

Parties

PlaintiffS. COLLIER GWIN
DefendantTHE BUBLE LOUNGE SAN FRANCISCO, INC.

Ruling

SF Superior Court - Real Property / Housing Dept 501 - CUD26682430 - August 25, 2026 Hearing date: August 25, 2026 Case number: CUD26682430 Case title: S. COLLIER GWIN VS. THE BUBLE LOUNGE SAN FRANCISCO, INC. Case Number: | | CUD26682430 | Case Title: | | S. COLLIER GWIN VS. THE BUBLE LOUNGE SAN FRANCISCO, INC. | Court Date: | | 2026-08-25 09:30 AM | Calendar Matter: | | MOTION TO QUASH SERVICE OF SUMMONS OR STAY OR DISMISS | Rulings: | | On the Real Property/Housing Court Motion calendar for August 25, 2026, line 9.

Defendant's Motion to Quash Service of Summons is GRANTED in part. The court considered Plaintiff's objection to the timing of the motion to quash and is ruling on the motion on the merits.

The Court has previously granted a motion to quash service of process via substitute service on "Arash Ghanadan, Agent for Service." The Court commented that Plaintiff advanced several theories as to other possible methods of service, but made no rulings as to those methods as there was no proof of service on file reflecting such service. The Court gave Plaintiffs an opportunity to file amendment proof of service or to re-serve. Plaintiff chose to file an amended proof of service.

Substitute service on "Arash Ghanadan, Chief Executive Officer/Agent for Service" is quashed. The Court has previously quashed service on "Arash Ghanadan, Agent for Service." Substitute service without attempts at personal service on Arash Ghanadan, Chief Executive Officer is improper. Motion is denied based on purportedly defective summons. The summons are code compliant. =(501/CFH)

Parties may appear in-person, telephonically or via Zoom (Video - Webinar ID: 160 560 5023; Password: 172849; or Phone Dial in: (669) 254-5252; Webinar ID: 160 560 5023; Password: 172849). Parties who intend to appear at the hearing must give notice to opposing parties and the court promptly, but no later than 4:00 p.m. the court day before the hearing unless the tentative ruling has specified that a hearing is required.

Notice of contesting a tentative ruling shall be provided by sending an email to the court to Department501ContestTR@sftc.org with a copy to all other parties stating, without argument, the portion(s) of the tentative ruling that the party contests. A party may not argue at the hearing if the opposing party is not notified, and the opposing party does not appear. | |

Cited authorities

Extracting citations from the ruling text…
Verify against the source PDF — LLM extraction may miss or mis-normalize citations.

Looking for case law or statutes not cited here? Search published authorities

Ask about this ruling

Examples: “Why did the court rule this way?” · “What were the procedural grounds?” · “Is appearance required?”

Answers reference only this ruling's text. Not legal advice — always verify against the source PDF.

Find similar rulings

Source

Share