BMO Bank N.A. v. Sunshine Trucking LLC

Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 10 11 BMO HARRIS BANK, N.A., ) Case No.: 1:24-cv-1062 JLT HBK ) 12 Plaintiff, ) ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND ) RECOMMENDATIONS, GRANTING 13 v. ) PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR DEFAULT ) JUDGMENT IN PART, AND DIRECTING THE 14 SUNSHINE TRUCKING LLC, et al., ) CLERK OF COURT TO CLOSE THE CASE ) 15 Defendants. ) (Docs. 12, 17) ) 16

17 BMO Harris Bank N.A. seeks to hold Sunshine Trucking LLC and Kamal Mann liable for 18 breach of contract related to a Loan and Security Agreement. (See generally Doc. 1.) After 19 Defendants failed to answer, the Court entered default against Defendants. (Doc. 10.) Plaintiff 20 now seeks default judgment against Defendants. (Doc. 12.) 21 The magistrate judge determined the Court has diversity jurisdiction over the claims 22 presented and personal jurisdiction over Defendants. (Doc. 17 at 4-6.) The magistrate judge also 23 found Plaintiff complied with the service requirements under Rule 4 of the Federal Rules of Civil 24 Procedure. (Id. at 6-7.) Examining the sufficiency of the complaint, the magistrate judge found 25 Plaintiff alleged sufficient facts to state a claim for breach of contract against Defendants and 26 “submits evidence in support of its damages claim.” (Id. at 8.) The magistrate judge determined 27 the factors identified by the Ninth Circuit in Eitel v. McCool, 782 F.2d 1470, 1471-72 (9th Cir. 28 1986) weighed in favor of default judgment and recommended the Court grant the motion, with 1 damages awarded in the amount of $173,682.31, plus post-judgment interest. (Id. at 7-10.) 2 The magistrate judge found Plaintiff is also entitled to an award of attorney fees and costs. 3 (Doc. 17 at 10-12.) The magistrate judge found the requested hourly rate of $325 was reasonable 4 based upon the experience of counsel. (Id. at 12.) In addition, the magistrate judge observed: 5 “According to the declaration of Attorney Ito and the corresponding invoices, Attorney Ito 6 expended a total of 8.30 hours of work and billed the Plaintiff $2,697.50 for attorney fees in 7 relation to this matter through October 17, 2024.” (Id. at 11.) The magistrate judge noted Mr. Ito 8 also anticipated that it would “take at least 3 hours at a rate of $325” to complete the motion for 9 default judgment, excluding any appearance at a hearing on the motion. (Id.) The magistrate 10 judge recommended the anticipated time not be awarded, because there was “no evidence to 11 support this estimate.” (Id.) Finally, the magistrate judge also found costs in the amount of 12 $695.28—which included the court filing fee and service of process—were reasonable and 13 recommended the Court award the requested amount. (Id. at 12.) 14 The Court served the Findings and Recommendations on Plaintiff, which served the 15 document on Defendants and filed proof of service. (Doc. 18.) The Court notified the parties that 16 any objections were due within 14 days. (Doc. 15 at 15.) The Court advised the parties that the 17 “failure to file objections within the specified time may result in the waiver of rights on appeal.” 18 (Id. at 13, citing Wilkerson v. Wheeler, 772 F.3d 834, 838-39 (9th Cir. 2014).) No objections 19 were filed, and the deadline for doing so has passed. 20 According to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1), this Court performed a de novo review of this case. 21 Having carefully reviewed the matter, the Court concludes the Findings and Recommendations 22 are supported by the record and proper analysis. Thus, the Court ORDERS: 23 1. The Findings and Recommendations issued January 27, 2025 (Doc. 17) are 24 ADOPTED in full. 25 2. Plaintiff’s motion for default judgment (Doc. 12) is GRANTED in part. 26 3. Plaintiff is AWARDED monetary damages in the amount of $173,682.31. 27 4. Plaintiff is AWARDED interest at the contracted rate of $77.55 for each day after 28 October 15, 2024. 1 5. Plaintiffs request for fees and costs is GRANTED, in the modified amount of 2 $2,697.50 in attorney fees and $695.28 in costs, for a total of $3,392.78. 3 6. Plaintiff is AWARDED possession of the subject vehicle, VIN 4 3AKJHHDRS5PSUH9960, and Defendants SHALL return and/or permit Plaintiff 5 to take possession of the vehicle. 6 7. Upon recovery and sale of the vehicle in a commercially reasonable manner, 7 Plaintiff SHALL credit the net sale proceeds of the vehicle toward the monetary 8 judgment awarded herein. 9 8. The Clerk of Court is directed to enter judgment in favor of Plaintiff and against 10 Defendants, and to close this case. 11 b IT IS SO ORDERED. 13 | Dated: _ February 14, 2025 Cerin | Tower TED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28