United States District Court, E.D. California
ORDER DIRECTING PLAINTIFFS TO FILE SUPPLEMENTAL
BRIEFING RE MOTION FOR DEFAULT JUDGMENT
before the Court is Plaintiffs' motion for default
judgment against Defendants Rafael Villafan (“Defendant
Villafan”) and Demi Ag, Inc. (“Defendant Demi
Ag”) (“defaulting defendants”) which was
referred to the undersigned pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §
636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302.
November 22, 2017, the Court held a hearing on the motion for
default judgment. Estella Cisneros appeared on behalf of
Plaintiffs. Defendants did not appear.
commenced this action on May 13, 2016. (ECF No. 1.) Defendant
Villafan has not answered the complaint. Defendant Demi Ag
answered the complaint on June 3, 2016. (ECF No. 4.) However,
the answer was filed by the owner of the business, Margarita
Ortega, and not a lawyer. On June 7, 2016, the Court issued
an order requiring Defendant Demi Ag to retain counsel and
have said counsel appear in the matter. (ECF No. 5.) When
Defendant Demi Ag did not respond to the June 7, 2016 order,
the Court issued an order requiring Defendant Demi Ag to show
cause why its answer should not be stricken for its failure
to comply with the Court's June 7, 2016 order. (ECF No.
12.) Defendant Demi Ag did not respond to the Court's
order to show cause. Therefore, on August 23, 2016, the Court
struck Defendant Demi Ag's answer from the record. (ECF
September 27, 2016, Plaintiffs filed an amended request to
enter default against Defendants Villafan and Demi Ag. (ECF
No. 16.) On that same day, the Court entered default against
these defendants. (ECF Nos. 17, 18.)
filed a first amended complaint on October 6, 2016. (First
Amended Complaint (“FAC”) ¶ 29, ECF No.
October 6, 2017, Plaintiffs filed a motion for default
judgment against Defendant Villafan and Defendant Demi Ag.
(ECF No. 37.) Plaintiffs' first amended complaint also
named Rafael Villafan DBA Demi Ag. Inc. as a defendant in
addition to Defendant Villafan. At the hearing on the motion
for default judgment, Plaintiffs stated that they are not
seeking default judgment against Rafael Villafan DBA Demi Ag.
the hearing on the motion for default judgment, Plaintiffs
requested that they be allowed to file supplemental briefing
to address some of the Court's questions. The Court finds
that supplemental briefing would aid the Court in its
analysis of Plaintiff's motion for default judgment, and
therefore, the Court directs Plaintiffs to file supplemental
briefing addressing the following issues.
Attorneys' Fees and Costs
shall address why the Court should award Blanca Banuelos,
Estella Cisneros, Anali Cortez, and Cynthia Rice their
requested hourly rates for attorneys' fees. While
Plaintiffs attach an accounting of the attorneys' fees
and costs Plaintiffs have incurred to date in this action
that states an hourly rate for each attorney who has worked
on the matter, there is no information justifying the hourly
rates that are sought.
attorney's hourly rate is calculated according to the
prevailing market rates in the relevant community and should
comport with the rates prevailing in the community for
similar services by lawyers of reasonably comparable skill,
experience, and reputation. Shirrod v. Office of
Workers' Compensation Programs, 809 F.3d 1082, 1086
(9th Cir. 2015). “[T]he burden is on the fee applicant
to produce satisfactory evidence - in addition to the
attorney's own affidavits - that the requested rates are
in line with those prevailing in the ...