The following e-filed documents, listed by NYSCEF document number (Motion 001) 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 70 were read on this motion to/for DISMISSAL. DECISION ORDER ON MOTION Upon the foregoing documents, Matteo Deninno’s motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction pursuant to CPLR §3211 (a)(8) is denied and Kal Tire’s cross-motion for alternate service and an extension of time to complete service is denied as moot. The Relevant Facts and Circumstances This action arises from an alleged fraudulent scheme to defraud Kal Tire where Alessandro Vitale, a former Kal Tire employee, allegedly hired Mr. Deninno’s companies to perform services for Kal Tire at inflated prices in return for which Mr. Deninno paid kickbacks to Mr. Vitale. Kal Tire filed its complaint on December 23, 2019 (the Complaint; NYSCEF Doc. No. 1) On January 8, 2020, Kal Tire’s process server obtained Mr. Deninno’s address from the New York Department of Motor Vehicles (the DMV), which address was listed as 4142 24th St, Apt 826, Long Island City, New York (the LIC Address) (NYSCEF Doc. No. 24). Pursuant to an affidavit of service (NYSCEF Doc. No. 2; the Affidavit of Service), dated January 15, 2020, the Complaint was served at the LIC Address by leaving a copy of the papers with the concierge, Manuel Fajardo, “a person of suitable age and discretion, who refused access to [Mr. Deninno's] actual apartment, and accepted in accordance with his/her everyday duties.” A copy of the Complaint was also sent to the LIC Address by first class mail. Mr. Deninno filed the instant motion to dismiss in response. Discussion Mr. Deninno argues that the Complaint should be dismissed pursuant to CPLR §3211 (a)(8) for lack of jurisdiction as personal service was improper because Kal Tire did not deliver the service papers to Mr. Deninno at his actual place of business, dwelling place or usual place of abode. In its opposition papers, Kal Tire argues that Mr. Deninno’s motion to dismiss should be denied because (i) the presumption of proper service under the Affidavit of Service is unrebutted, (ii) Mr. Deninno should be estopped from denying that he lived at the LIC Address, or (iii) in the alternative, Kal Tire should be granted its cross-motion for alternate service and an extension of time to complete service. Pursuant to CPLR §3211 (a)(8), dismissal is warranted where the court lacks jurisdiction over a defendant. CPLR §308 (2) provides for personal service by (i) delivering the summons to a person of suitable age and discretion at the dwelling place or usual place of abode of the person to be served, (ii) mailing the summons by first class mail to the last known residence, and (iii) filing proof of service. Although an affidavit of service in accordance with CPLR §308 is prima facie evidence that process was properly served (Matter of de Sanchez, 57 AD3d 452, 454 [1st Dept 2008]), a fact-based, sworn denial of service is sufficient to rebut the presumptive validity of service (Ananda Capital Partners v. Stav Elec. Sys. (1994), 301 AD2d 430, 430 [1st Dept 2003]). Where the presumption of valid service is overcome by a nonconclusory, sworn denial, a traverse hearing is required to determine whether service was proper (id.). Here, the Affidavit of Service indicates that service was effected on Mr. Deninno through the concierge at the LIC Address on January 15, 2020. To the extent that Mr. Deninno argues that the concierge did not constitute a person of suitable age and discretion, this is incorrect because service left with a doorman, followed by a mailing, has been held to be valid where building access is prohibited, as was the case here (see Rosenberg v. Haddad, 208 AD2d 468, 469 [1st Dept 1994]). Mr. Deninno also denies that the LIC Address was his dwelling place or usual place of abode. Instead, Mr. Deninno attests that he never resided at the LIC Address and that his friend who lived there, Rebecca Querci, let him use the address for his driver’s license (NYSCEF Doc. No. 7, 10). Mr. Deninno explains that the LIC Address was used to renew his driver’s license on September 6, 2019 before he moved to Italy on September 15, 2019 with the intent to stay there permanently (id.,
