Pandvil LLC v. Jean Paul Chavez Pino

D. Arizona

Pandvil LLC v. Jean Paul Chavez Pino

DecidedMarch 6, 2026

Docket2:24-cv-03216

StatusUnknown

This text of Pandvil LLC v. Jean Paul Chavez Pino (Pandvil LLC v. Jean Paul Chavez Pino) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, D. Arizona primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Pandvil LLC v. Jean Paul Chavez Pino, (D. Ariz. 2026).

Pincite

Opinion

1 WO 2 3 4 5 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

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

10 Plaintiff, ORDER

11 v.

12 Jean Paul Chavez Pino,

13 Defendant. 14 15 Before the Court is Plaintiff Pandvil LLC’s Motion for Entry of Default Judgment 16 (Doc. 22). 17 “[T]he party seeking to invoke the jurisdiction of the federal court has the burden of 18 establishing that jurisdiction exists.” Data Disc, Inc. v. Sys. Tech. Assoc., Inc., 557 F.2d 19 1280, 1285 (9th Cir. 1977). Plaintiff states only that “[j]urisdiction and venue are proper in 20 this Court. The Defendant engaged in actions which caused harm and damage to the 21 Plaintiff located in Arizona.” (Id. at 2.) This bare assertion is insufficient to assure the Court 22 that Defendant, a resident of Ecuador, purposefully directed his activities at Arizona. See 23 Walden v. Fiore, 571 U.S. 277, 290 (2014) (holding that “mere injury to a forum resident 24 is not a sufficient connection to the forum” to establish personal jurisdiction); see also 25 Bridge v. Nature’s Sunshine Prods., No. SACV 21-1073 JVS, 2021 WL 4572006, at *5 26 (C.D. Cal. Aug. 4, 2021) (“[A] conclusory statement about the existence of personal 27 jurisdiction is insufficient for Plaintiff[] to carry their burden.”). 28 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. 4 IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiff's Motion for Entry of Default Judgment (Doc. 22) || is DENIED without prejudice. 6 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that if Plaintiff chooses to file a renewed motion, it must do so no later than March 18, 2026. 8 Dated this 6th day of March, 2026. 9 Micha T. Siburde Michael T. Liburdi 12 United States District Judge 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

_2-

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

1 WO 2 3 4 5 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

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

10 Plaintiff, ORDER

11 v.

12 Jean Paul Chavez Pino,

13 Defendant. 14 15 Before the Court is Plaintiff Pandvil LLC’s Motion for Entry of Default Judgment 16 (Doc. 22). 17 “[T]he party seeking to invoke the jurisdiction of the federal court has the burden of 18 establishing that jurisdiction exists.” Data Disc, Inc. v. Sys. Tech. Assoc., Inc., 557 F.2d 19 1280, 1285 (9th Cir. 1977). Plaintiff states only that “[j]urisdiction and venue are proper in 20 this Court. The Defendant engaged in actions which caused harm and damage to the 21 Plaintiff located in Arizona.” (Id. at 2.) This bare assertion is insufficient to assure the Court 22 that Defendant, a resident of Ecuador, purposefully directed his activities at Arizona. See 23 Walden v. Fiore, 571 U.S. 277, 290 (2014) (holding that “mere injury to a forum resident 24 is not a sufficient connection to the forum” to establish personal jurisdiction); see also 25 Bridge v. Nature’s Sunshine Prods., No. SACV 21-1073 JVS, 2021 WL 4572006, at *5 26 (C.D. Cal. Aug. 4, 2021) (“[A] conclusory statement about the existence of personal 27 jurisdiction is insufficient for Plaintiff[] to carry their burden.”). 28 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. 4 IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiff's Motion for Entry of Default Judgment (Doc. 22) || is DENIED without prejudice. 6 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that if Plaintiff chooses to file a renewed motion, it must do so no later than March 18, 2026. 8 Dated this 6th day of March, 2026. 9 Micha T. Siburde Michael T. Liburdi 12 United States District Judge 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

_2-

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Pandvil LLC v. Jean Paul Chavez Pino, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/pandvil-llc-v-jean-paul-chavez-pino-azd-2026.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack