Dalrada Financial Corp (DFCO)

[XenaLives]

You didn't cite a source, but I think I found it.

The pressure is on DFCO -

That said, as Plaintiffs indicate that a skip trace to locate Defendant is ongoing and allege facts that suggest that Defendant is evading service of process, the Court will GRANT Plaintiffs ninety (90) days from the date of this Order to serve Defendant through means authorized by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(f). If Plaintiffs are unable to serve Defendant by this deadline, Plaintiffs SHALL FILE a status report describing their efforts to serve Defendant during the extension. If said status report does not demonstrate good cause for an additional extension, the Court may examine whether dismissal of this action is appropriate based on Plaintiffs' failure to serve. See Nylok Corp. v. Fastener World Inc., 396 F.3d 805, 807 (7th Cir. 2005) (“Because district courts need to be able to control their dockets, we have stated that the amount of time allowed for foreign service is not unlimited.”); Inst. of Cetacean Rsch. v. Sea Shepherd Conservation Soc 'y, 153 F.Supp.3d 1291, 1320 (W.D. Wash. 2015).

Plaintiffs allege that Defendant “has contacted one of [Plaintiffs'] officers and has informed [the officer] that [Defendant] is aware that Plaintiff[s] ha[ve] filed a lawsuit against him.” Mot. at 3.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

https://casetext.com/case/dalrada-precision-corp-v-cox-1

As for this claim... it seems like unsupported B.S. because you haven't linked to the filing..

They are two different proceedings. The January Filing was related to a double check on some financials I believe. There was no error found but I believe they were just doing due diligence. The restraining order case is something different and looks as though it is not finalized. See the February notice posted at the bottom. I believe from what I'm interpreting and my non-professional first take is this:

From what I have seen there is only one proceeding which will get dismissed if BONAR can't achieve proper service and establish jurisdiction of the court.