Rubicon Global Ventures, Inc. v. Chongquing Zongshen Group Import/Export Corp.

Good Law
494 F. App'x 736
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitAugust 30, 201210-36148, 11-35045, 11-35090California1,866 words

Opinion

Opinion

MEMORANDUM

Appellants Rubicon Global Ventures, Inc. and Z Motors, Inc. appeal, inter alia: (a) the district court’s setting aside of the default judgments in District Court Docket Nos. 3:05-cv-01809 (“Rubicon /”), 3:09-cv-00818 (“Rubicon II”), and 3:09-cv-01397 (“Rubicon III ”) on the basis of insufficiency of service; and (b) the district court’s dismissal of Ying Zuo and Zongshen USA Holdings, Inc. for lack of personal jurisdiction. For the reasons below, we find that service was sufficient on all ap-pellees other than Zongshen Zuo. As to the dismissals for lack of personal jurisdiction, we find that the district court erred only as to Ying Zuo. We therefore affirm in part, reverse in part, and remand for further proceedings.

The district court set aside the defaults and default judgments on the grounds that such judgments were void for insufficiency of service of process. The Ninth Circuit has found that “[a] final judgment is ‘void’ for purposes of Rule 60(b)(4) only if the court that considered it lacked jurisdiction, either as to the subject matter of the dispute or over the parties to be bound, or acted in a manner inconsistent with due process of law.” United States v.…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.