Automated Summary
Key Facts
Plaintiff Emma Cuadros Ortiz filed a lawsuit against Defendants Circle K Stores, Inc., Raymond Kane Gallardo, and Jane Doe Gallardo (later amended to Carolina Gallardo) alleging sexual harassment under Title VII and Arizona Civil Rights Act, assault, battery, and intentional infliction of emotional distress. Plaintiff attempted to serve the Gallardos four times at 342 W. Corona Rd., Tucson, AZ 85756 in September 2025 but was unsuccessful as no one answered the door despite vehicles registered to the Gallardos being present. The Court granted Plaintiff's Motion for Alternative Service, ordering that copies of the Summons, Complaint, and Order be posted to the front door and mailed via U.S. Certified Mail and regular first-class mail, with evidence of service required by November 19, 2025.
Issues
- Whether the Plaintiff has made the requisite showing that traditional means of service are impracticable under Arizona Rule 4.1(k) to justify alternative service of process on the Gallardos defendants.
- Whether Plaintiff's proposed alternative method of service (posting at the address and mailing via certified and first-class mail) comports with constitutional due process requirements.
Holdings
The Court granted Plaintiff's Motion for Alternative Service because traditional service attempts on the Gallardos were unsuccessful and impracticable. After four failed service attempts at the Corona address in September 2025, with no one answering the door despite multiple vehicles registered to the Gallardos being present, the Court found the impracticability requirement satisfied. The proposed alternative service method—posting the summons, complaint, and order at the front door and mailing copies via U.S. Certified Mail and regular first-class mail—comports with due process as it is the best means practicable to notify the defendants.
Remedies
The Court grants Plaintiff Emma Cuadros Ortiz's Motion for Alternative Service. Plaintiff must file satisfactory evidence by November 19, 2025 that copies of the Summons, Complaint, and Order were posted to the front door of 342 W. Corona Rd., Tucson, AZ 85756, and mailed to the same address via both U.S. Certified Mail with return receipt requested, and U.S. regular first-class mail without return receipt requested. This alternative service method is authorized because traditional service attempts at the Corona address were unsuccessful and the Gallardos appear to be evading service.
Legal Principles
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(e)(1) allows service following state law; Arizona Rule 4.1(k) permits alternative service when traditional means are impracticable. The impracticability standard requires less than 'due diligence' for service by publication and less than complete inability to serve. Alternative service must be reasonably calculated to apprise interested parties of the action and afford them opportunity to respond (Mullane v. Central Hanover Bank & Trust Co.).
Precedent Name
- Rio Props., Inc. v. RioInt'l Interlink
- Ruffino v. Lokosky
- Amaya v. Sw. Auto Sales & Fin. LLC
- Blair v. Burgener
- Sobh v. Phoenix Graphix Inc.
Cited Statute
- Civil rights protection statute
- State civil rights protection statute
- Arizona civil procedure rule for alternative means of service
- Federal civil procedure rule for service of process
Judge Name
James A. Teilborg
Passage Text
- Because traditional means of service have proven impracticable and the proposed method of alternative service comports with due process, the Court will grant Plaintiff's request.
- Given the four service attempts—made on four different dates, at different times—and the Gallardos' apparent evasion of service, the Court finds the 'impracticable' requirement of Arizona Rule 4.1(k) is satisfied.
- The Court finds that Plaintiff's proposed method of service comports with due process because it is the 'best means practicable' to notify the Gallardos of the updated complaint and afford them an opportunity to respond.