SOTO vs SECURUS TECHNOLOGIES, et al.

25CV009163: SOTO 2888246 vs SECURUS TECHNOLOGIES, et al. 11/10/2025 Hearing on Motion - Other for Entry of Default in Department 28

Tentative Ruling

Tentative Ruling: This matter was continued to November 10, 2025 pursuant to the Court's procedure in matters involving self-represented incarcerated litigants. The original tentative ruling is republished below. The Litigation Coordinator shall make Plaintiff Soto available, by Zoom or telephonically, at 1:30 p.m. on November 10, 2025. To appear on Zoom telephonically, call (833) 568-8864 and enter the Zoom ID: 16039062174.

Tentative Ruling: Plaintiff’s motion for an entry of default is DENIED. Plaintiff filed this lawsuit against “Securus Technologies & Aramark.” Plaintiff now brings a motion for entry of default, in which Plaintiff states that he mailed a copy of the summons, complaint, and civil case cover sheet to Securus technologies. On October 20, 2025, Plaintiff filed a Notice and Acknowledgment of Receipt to “Securus technologies & Aramark.” The Notice and Acknowledgement form is signed by Plaintiff and indicates the summons and complaint were mailed on May 15, 2025.

While the “Acknowledgment of Receipt” part of the form is dated “5/21/25” and signed, the signature is illegible. Additionally, the “Type or print your name and name of entity, if any, on whose behalf this form is signed” portion of the form is blank. Accordingly, there is no indication that receipt of the summons and complaint was acknowledged on behalf of either Defendant Securus Technologies or Defendant Aramark. Without proper proof of service or completed notice of acknowledgement and receipt on file, the Court cannot enter the default of any defendant.

This minute order is effective immediately. No formal order or other notice is required. (Code Civ. Proc. §1019.5; CRC Rule 3.1312.)