IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
March 31, 2009
MARSHALL LOSKOT, PLAINTIFF,
TRAN NGUYEN, DEFENDANT.
FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Plaintiff's motion for default judgment was submitted on the papers. Upon review of the documents in support, no opposition having been filed, and good cause appearing therefor, THE COURT FINDS AS FOLLOWS:
The complaint in this matter was served upon defendant Nguyen and proof of service was filed January 2, 2009. Cf. Pacific Atlantic Trading Co. v. M/V Main Express, 758 F.2d 1325, 1331 (9th Cir. 1985) (default judgment void without personal jurisdiction). The Clerk of the Court entered default against defendant Nguyen on January 20, 2009. Plaintiff's present motion for entry of default judgment was served by mail on defendant Nguyen at defendant's last known address.
Entry of default effects an admission of all well-pleaded allegations of the complaint by the defaulted party. Geddes v. United Financial Group, 559 F.2d 557, 560 (9th Cir. 1977). Entry of default judgment is proper where, as in the present case, the facts established by the default support the causes of action pled in the complaint. The complaint and the affidavits filed in support of the motion for entry of default judgment also support the finding that plaintiff is entitled to the relief requested in the prayer for default judgment, which does not differ in kind from the relief requested in the complaint. Henry v. Sneiders, 490 F.2d 315, 317 & n.2 (9th Cir. 1974). There are no policy considerations to preclude the entry of default judgment of the type requested. See Eitel v. McCool, 782 F.2d 1470, 1471-72 (9th Cir. 1986) (enumerating factors to be considered).
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that plaintiff's motion for entry of default judgment be GRANTED and that judgment be awarded against defendant Nguyen in the amount of $4,000 and attorneys' fees and costs in the amount of $6,266.75.
These findings and recommendations are submitted to the District Judge assigned to this matter, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within ten days after being served with these findings and recommendations, any party may file written objections with the court and serve a copy on all parties. Such a document should be captioned "Objections to Magistrate Judge's Findings and Recommendations." Any reply to the objections shall be served and filed within ten days after service of the objections. The parties are advised that failure to file objections within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court's order. Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991).
© 1992-2009 VersusLaw Inc.