Plaintiff sought to serve her petition for issuance of a Civil Harrassment injunction on the defendant by social media since she had been unable to serve him by normal means of service of process.  Though it notes that some states (New York, New Jersey and Texas) have allowed service of process by social media, this decision holds that at least at present, California law does not permit service by social media.  In particular, CCP 527.6(m) and Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.1160(c) require personal service of a petition for a civil harrassment injunction and TRO, respectively.  Alternative means of service of process may be used under CCP 413.30 only if other law does not specify how service shall be made.  Here, CCP 527.6(m) specifies persoal service, so alternative means cannot be used.