Bradley James Albert v. Discover Bank

[DO NOT PUBLISH]
In the
United States Court of Appeals
For the Eleventh Circuit
____________________
No. 21-12011
Non-Argument Calendar
____________________
BRADLEY JAMES ALBERT,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
versus
DISCOVER BANK,
Defendant-Appellee.
____________________
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of Georgia
D.C. Docket No. 1:20-cv-05146-MLB
____________________
USCA11 Case: 21-12011 Date Filed: 04/21/2022 Page: 1 of 3

-- 1 of 3 --

2 Opinion of the Court 21-12011
Before WILLIAM PRYOR, Chief Judge, WILSON and
ANDERSON, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:
Bradley Albert appeals
pro se the dismissal of his complaint
against Discover Bank. The district court dismissed Albert’s com-
plaint for insufficient service of process, Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(5), and
denied his motion for a default judgment. We affirm.
On a dismissal for failure to effectuate service of process, we
review findings of fact for clear error and the application of law to
those facts
de novo.
Albra v. Advan, Inc., 490 F.3d 826, 829 (11th
Cir. 2007). We review the denial of a motion for a default judg-
ment for abuse of discretion.
Mitchell v. Brown & Williamson To-
bacco Corp., 294 F.3d 1309, 1316 (11th Cir. 2002).
The district court did not err. Albert failed to properly serve
process for the district court to exercise personal jurisdiction over
Discover Bank.
See Hemispherx Biopharma, Inc. v. Johannesburg
Consol. Invs., 553 F.3d 1351, 1360 (11th Cir. 2008). Albert neglected
to attach a summons to his complaint.
See Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(c)(1).
He mailed a copy of his complaint to Discover Bank “through U.S.
First Class with tracking and adequate postage” to a post office box
in Salt Lake City, but neither Rule 4,
id. 4(e)(2), nor the law of Geor-
gia, “where the district court is located,”
id. 4(e)(1); O.C.G.A. § 9-
11-4(e)(1)(A), allows service of process by mail. And in Utah, where
Albert mailed his complaint, a party must obtain a signature
USCA11 Case: 21-12011 Date Filed: 04/21/2022 Page: 2 of 3

-- 2 of 3 --

21-12011 Opinion of the Court 3
confirmation to perfect service by mail. Utah R. Civ. P. 4(d)(2)(B).
Even after Discover Bank moved to dismiss, Albert never at-
tempted to perfect service of process.
Albert argues that Discover Bank waived service of process,
but we disagree. Albert never sent the bank a notice and request
for a waiver of service, Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(d), nor did the bank agree
to waive formal service.
Lepone-Dempsey v. Carroll Cty.
Comm’rs, 476 F.3d 1277, 1281 (11th Cir. 2007).
Albert also never moved for an extension of time to perfect
service, Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(m), and he offers no “good cause”—that
is, “some outside factor, such as reliance on faulty advice, rather
than inadvertence or negligence”—to excuse his inadequate ser-
vice,
Lepone-Dempsey, 476 F.3d at 1281–82. And without proper
service of process, the district court had no power to enter a default
judgment against the bank.
We AFFIRM the dismissal of Albert’s complaint.
USCA11 Case: 21-12011 Date Filed: 04/21/2022 Page: 3 of 3

-- 3 of 3 --