United States v. Salazar

Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Case No. 1:23-cv-01282-JLT-CDB

12 Plaintiff, ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS AND DENYING 13 v. DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO SET ASIDE 14 DEFAULT JUDGMENT JAVIER SALAZAR, JR., et al., 15 (Doc. 40) Defendants. 16 17

18 The United States of America initiated this action against Javier Salazar, Jr., Javier 19 Salazar Sr., and Ricardo Covarrubias to enforce the provisions of Title VIII of the Civil Rights 20 Act of 1968, as amended, 42 U.S.C. §§ 3601, et seq. (the “Fair Housing Act” or “FHA”), on 21 behalf of Angela McGinnis. (Doc. 1 at ¶¶ 1-2.) On October 28, 2024, the undersigned adopted the 22 magistrate judge’s findings and recommendations and granted Plaintiff’s motion for default 23 judgment against Defendants. (Doc. 35.) 24 On November 25, 2024, Defendants (through newly noticed counsel) filed a motion to set 25 aside the default judgment. (Doc. 37.) Plaintiff filed an opposition on December 9, 2024. (Doc. 26 39.) The motion was referred to the assigned magistrate judge. (Doc. 38.) 27 On April 23, 2025, the assigned magistrate judge issued findings and recommendations to 1 | defense weigh in favor of maintaining the default judgment. (Doc. 40.) (citing Brandt v. Am. 2 | Bankers Ins. Co. of Fla., 653 F.3d 1108, 1111 (9th Cir. 2011); U.S. v. Aguilar, 782 F.3d 1101, 3 | 1105 (9th Cir. 2015); and U.S. v. Signed Personal Check No. 730 of Yubran S. Mesle, 615 F.3d 4 | 1085, 1091 (9th Cir. 2010).) The findings and recommendations were served upon the parties and 5 | advised them that they may file written objections within 14 days (i.e., not later than May 7, 6 | 2025) and that “failure to file any objections within the specified time may result in the waiver of 7 | rights on appeal.” (/d. at 13) (citing Wilkerson v. Wheeler, 772 F.3d 834, 839 (9th Cir. 2014).) No 8 | party filed objections or any other response and the deadline to do so has passed. 9 Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), and Local Rule 304, this Court conducted a de novo 10 | review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire matter, this Court concludes the findings 11 | and recommendations are supported by the record and by proper analysis. 12 CONCLUSION AND ORDER 13 For the reasons set forth above: 14 1. The April 23, 2025, findings and recommendations (Doc. 40) are ADOPTED IN 15 FULL. 16 2. Defendants’ motion to set aside default judgment (Doc. 37) is DENIED. 17 18 IT IS SO ORDERED. 19 | Dated: _ May 13, 2025 Charis [Tourn TED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28