Sanchez v. Garcia

District Court, E.D. California·Decided January 29, 2024·No. 2:23-cv-01192·Unknown

Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 10 11 JAVIER OLIVER SANCHEZ, No. 2:23-cv-1192 KJM DB 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER

15 Defendant. 16 17 On December 19, 2023, plaintiff filed a motion for default judgment. (ECF No. 14.) The 18 motion is noticed for hearing before the undersigned on February 2, 2024, pursuant to Local Rule 19 302(c)(19). (ECF No. 16.) On December 20, 2023, plaintiff filed a request to appear at the 20 hearing via Zoom. (ECF No. 15.) Granting or denying default judgment is within the court’s 21 sound discretion. Draper v. Coombs, 792 F.2d 915, 924-25 (9th Cir. 1986); Aldabe v. Aldabe, 22 616 F.2d. 1089, 1092 (9th Cir. 1980). The court is free to consider a variety of factors in 23 exercising its discretion. Eitel v. McCool, 782 F.2d 1470, 1471-72 (9th Cir. 1986). Among the 24 factors that may be considered by the court are 25 (1) the possibility of prejudice to the plaintiff, (2) the merits of plaintiff’s substantive claim, (3) the sufficiency of the complaint, (4) 26 the sum of money at stake in the action; (5) the possibility of a dispute concerning material facts; (6) whether the default was due to 27 excusable neglect, and (7) the strong policy underlying the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure favoring decisions on the merits. 28 1 Eitel, 782 F.2d at 1471-72 (citing 6 Moore’s Federal Practice ¶ 55-05[2], at 55-24 to 55-26). 2 Plaintiff’s motion, however, does not discuss any of the factors noted above. Instead, it 3 simply provides the procedural history of this action, asks for default judgment and for an award 4 of $75,920.72. (ECF No. 14 at 4.) Plaintiff will, therefore, be ordered to file supplemental 5 briefing and the hearing of plaintiff’s motion will be continued. 6 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 7 1. The February 2, 2024 hearing of plaintiff’s motion for default judgment (ECF No. 14) 8 is continued to April 12, 2024; 9 2. On or before March 15, 2024, plaintiff shall file a supplemental brief addressing the 10 Eitel factors noted above; and 11 3. Plaintiff’s December 20, 2023 motion to appear via Zoom (ECF No. 15) is denied 12 without prejudice to renewal as having been rendered moot.

13 DATED: January 29, 2024 /s/ DEBORAH BARNES 14 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

20 DLB:6 DB\orders\orders.civil\sanchez1192.mdj.cont.ord 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

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

Sanchez v. Garcia, (E.D. Cal. 2024).

Sanchez v. Garcia (Sanchez v. Garcia) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Alvera M. Aldabe v. Charles D. Aldabe
616 F.2d 1089 (Ninth Circuit, 1980)
Gary R. Eitel v. William D. McCool
782 F.2d 1470 (Ninth Circuit, 1986)
Robert Draper v. Davis S. Coombs
792 F.2d 915 (Ninth Circuit, 1986)