United States District Court, N.D. California
BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE LABORERS HEALTH AND WELFARE TRUST FUND FOR NORTHERN CALIFORNIA, et al., Plaintiffs,
v.
GARRETT THOMPSON CONSTRUCTION, INC., Defendant.
ORDER REGARDING MOTION FOR DEFAULT JUDGMENT RE: DKT.
NO. 21
KANDIS
A. WESTMORE, UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
On
December 12, 2019, Plaintiffs Board of Trustees of the
Laborers Health and Welfare Trust Fund for Northern
California, et al. filed a Motion for Default Judgment. (Dkt.
No. 21.) All briefing shall be in compliance with Civil Local
Rule 7, including opposition and reply filing deadlines.
However, if no opposition is filed by the deadline under Rule
7, Plaintiffs shall instead file a proposed order by the
reply deadline. The submission shall be structured as
outlined in Attachment A below and include all relevant legal
authority and analysis necessary to establish the case.
Plaintiffs shall also email the proposed findings in
Microsoft Word (.docx) format to kawpo@cand.uscourts.gov. No
chambers copies of the proposed order need to be submitted.
Plaintiffs
are ordered to serve this notice upon all other parties in
this action.
IT IS
SO ORDERED.
ATTACHMENT
A
*
* *
INTRODUCTION
(Relief
sought and disposition.)
I.
BACKGROUND
(The
pertinent factual and procedural background, including
citations to the Complaint and record. Plaintiff(s) should be
mindful that only facts in the Complaint are taken as true
for purposes of default judgment; therefore, Plaintiff(s)
should cite to the Complaint whenever possible.)
II.
LEGAL STANDARD
(Include
the following standard)
Federal
Rule of Civil Procedure 55(b)(2) permits a court to enter a
final judgment in a case following a defendant's default.
Shanghai Automation Instrument Co. v. Kuei, 194
F.Supp.2d 995, 999 (N.D. Cal. 2001). Whether to enter a
judgment lies within the court's discretion. Id.
at 999 (citing Draper v. Coombs, 792 F.2d 915,
924-25 (9th Cir. 1986)).
Before
assessing the merits of a default judgment, a court must
confirm that it has subject matter jurisdiction over the case
and personal jurisdiction over the parties, as well as ensure
the adequacy of service on the defendant. See In re
Tuli, 172 F.3d 707, 712 (9th Cir. 1999). If the court
finds these elements satisfied, it turns to the following
...