United Financial Casualty Company v. Ratte

E.D. California

United Financial Casualty Company v. Ratte

District Court, E.D. California·Decided January 8, 2020·No. 1:19-cv-00739·Unknown

Opinion

UNITED FINANCIAL CASUALTY ) Case No.: 1:19-cv-0739 - LJO - JLT COMPANY, ) ) ORDER ADOPTING IN FULL THE FINDINGS Plaintiff, ) AND RECOMMENDATIONS DATED ) DECEMBER 2, 2019 (Doc. 31) v. ) ) ORDER DIRECTING THE CLERK OF COURT TO GULBAG SINGH RATTE, et al., ) ENTER DEFAULT AGAINST DEFENDANT HS ) BROTHERS EXPRESS Defendants. ) )

United Financial Casualty Company seeks declaratory relief against the defendants, asserting it does not have a duty to indemnify defendants HS Brothers Express, Inc.; Harjit Singh; or Harpreet Singh in an action filed in state court related to an accident. (See Doc. 1) HS Brothers has failed to appear with through counsel, despite the information provided to Harjit Singh—who identifies himself as the “sole owner”— and has failed to comply with the Court’s orders. On December 2, 2019, the magistrate judge recommended the Answer filed by Harjit Singh, to the extent it was filed on behalf of HS Brothers Express, be stricken and default be entered against HS Brothers Express. (Doc. 31) The parties were given fourteen days to file any objections to the recommendations that default be entered against defendant HS Brothers Express. (Doc. 13 at 5) In addition, the parties were “are advised that failure to file objections within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order.” (Id., citing Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991); Wilkerson v. Wheeler, 772 F.3d 834, 834 (9th Cir. 2014)). To date, no objections have been filed. In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636 (b)(1)(C) and Britt v. Simi Valley United School Dist., 708 F.2d 452, 454 (9th Cir. 1983), this Court conducted a de novo review of the case. Having carefully reviewed the file, the Court finds the Findings and Recommendations are supported by the record and proper analysis. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED: 1. The Findings and Recommendations dated December 2, 2019 (Doc. 31) are ADOPTED IN FULL; 2. The Answer filed by Harjit Singh, to the extent it was filed on behalf of HS Brothers Express, Inc. (Doc. 14) is STRICKEN; and 3. The Clerk of Court is DIRECTED to enter default against HS Brothers Express, Inc.

Dated: January 7, 2020 /s/ Lawrence J. O’Neill _____ UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

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

UNITED FINANCIAL CASUALTY ) Case No.: 1:19-cv-0739 - LJO - JLT COMPANY, ) ) ORDER ADOPTING IN FULL THE FINDINGS Plaintiff, ) AND RECOMMENDATIONS DATED ) DECEMBER 2, 2019 (Doc. 31) v. ) ) ORDER DIRECTING THE CLERK OF COURT TO GULBAG SINGH RATTE, et al., ) ENTER DEFAULT AGAINST DEFENDANT HS ) BROTHERS EXPRESS Defendants. ) )

United Financial Casualty Company seeks declaratory relief against the defendants, asserting it does not have a duty to indemnify defendants HS Brothers Express, Inc.; Harjit Singh; or Harpreet Singh in an action filed in state court related to an accident. (See Doc. 1) HS Brothers has failed to appear with through counsel, despite the information provided to Harjit Singh—who identifies himself as the “sole owner”— and has failed to comply with the Court’s orders. On December 2, 2019, the magistrate judge recommended the Answer filed by Harjit Singh, to the extent it was filed on behalf of HS Brothers Express, be stricken and default be entered against HS Brothers Express. (Doc. 31) The parties were given fourteen days to file any objections to the recommendations that default be entered against defendant HS Brothers Express. (Doc. 13 at 5) In addition, the parties were “are advised that failure to file objections within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order.” (Id., citing Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991); Wilkerson v. Wheeler, 772 F.3d 834, 834 (9th Cir. 2014)). To date, no objections have been filed. In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636 (b)(1)(C) and Britt v. Simi Valley United School Dist., 708 F.2d 452, 454 (9th Cir. 1983), this Court conducted a de novo review of the case. Having carefully reviewed the file, the Court finds the Findings and Recommendations are supported by the record and proper analysis. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED: 1. The Findings and Recommendations dated December 2, 2019 (Doc. 31) are ADOPTED IN FULL; 2. The Answer filed by Harjit Singh, to the extent it was filed on behalf of HS Brothers Express, Inc. (Doc. 14) is STRICKEN; and 3. The Clerk of Court is DIRECTED to enter default against HS Brothers Express, Inc.

Dated: January 7, 2020 /s/ Lawrence J. O’Neill _____ UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

United Financial Casualty Company v. Ratte, (E.D. Cal. 2020).

Pincite

United Financial Casualty Company v. Ratte (United Financial Casualty Company v. Ratte) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related