Pandvil LLC v. Jean Paul Chavez Pino

Opinion

WO

Pandvil LLC, No. CV-24-03216-PHX-MTL

Plaintiff, ORDER

v.

Jean Paul Chavez Pino,

Defendant. Before the Court is Plaintiff Pandvil LLC’s Motion for Entry of Default Judgment (Doc. 22). “[T]he party seeking to invoke the jurisdiction of the federal court has the burden of establishing that jurisdiction exists.” Data Disc, Inc. v. Sys. Tech. Assoc., Inc., 557 F.2d 1280, 1285 (9th Cir. 1977). Plaintiff states only that “[j]urisdiction and venue are proper in this Court. The Defendant engaged in actions which caused harm and damage to the Plaintiff located in Arizona.” (Id. at 2.) This bare assertion is insufficient to assure the Court that Defendant, a resident of Ecuador, purposefully directed his activities at Arizona. See Walden v. Fiore, 571 U.S. 277, 290 (2014) (holding that “mere injury to a forum resident is not a sufficient connection to the forum” to establish personal jurisdiction); see also Bridge v. Nature’s Sunshine Prods., No. SACV 21-1073 JVS, 2021 WL 4572006, at *5 (C.D. Cal. Aug. 4, 2021) (“[A] conclusory statement about the existence of personal jurisdiction is insufficient for Plaintiff[] to carry their burden.”). Pursuant to this Court’s continuing obligation to ensure that it possesses jurisdiction, 1 the Court will deny Plaintiffs motion (Doc. 22) without prejudice. If Plaintiff chooses to file a renewed motion for default judgment, it must adequately demonstrate the existence of personal jurisdiction. IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiff's Motion for Entry of Default Judgment (Doc. 22) is DENIED without prejudice. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that if Plaintiff chooses to file a renewed motion, it must do so no later than March 18, 2026. Dated this 6th day of March, 2026. Micha T. Siburde Michael T. Liburdi United States District Judge

_2-