Case 9:09-cv-80469-KAM Document 47 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/14/2009 Page 1 of 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA JANE DOE II Plaintiff, vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN, and Defendants. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CASE NO.: 09-80469-CIV-MARRA PLAINTIFF'S MEMORANDUM OF LAW IN OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT MOTION TO SET ASIDE DEFAULT Plaintiff, JANE DOE II, through counsel, opposes the Defendant Motion to Set Aside Default. Defendant offers no proof that she did not actually receive the service of process; she says she "contests" the efforts but offers no evidence to contest the Affidavit of the process server, who made six (6) attempts to serve before being forced to resort to "nail and mail" service, valid under New York law. Maines Paper & Food Service, Inc. v. Boulevard Burgers Corporation, 52 A.D. 3d 1150, 861 N.Y.S. 2d 808 (N.Y.S.C., Appellate Division, June 26, 2008). Defendant first argues that Plaintiffs Motion is defective because the Plaintiff did not timely file the Affidavit of Service. However, a delay in filing proof of service under CPLR 308 is merely a procedural irregularity, not jurisdictional, and may be corrected nunc pro tunc by the court. Haegeland v Massa, 75 A.D. 2d 864; Hudela v Posner, 70 Misc 2d 726. If anything, the delay in filing the Affidavit of Service provided Defendant additional time to avoid being defaulted. An action is commenced with the delivery of a EFTA02750653