Operating Engineers Health And Welfare Trust Fund For Northern California v. BCP-3D, Inc. ( 2020 )

1 2 3 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 4 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 5 OPERATING ENGINEERS HEALTH 6 AND WELFARE TRUST FUND FOR Case No. 4:19-cv-00273-KAW NORTHERN CALIFORNIA, et al., 7 ORDER REGARDING MOTION FOR Plaintiffs, DEFAULT JUDGMENT v. Re: Dkt. No. 24 9 10 BCP-3D, INC., et al., Defendants. 11 a 12 On March 10, 2020, Plaintiffs Operating Engineers Health And Welfare Trust Fund For ~ 13 || Northern California, et al. filed a Motion for Default Judgment. (Dkt. No. 24.) All briefing shall 14 || be in compliance with Civil Local Rule 7, including opposition and reply filing deadlines. 15 || However, if no opposition is filed by the deadline under Rule 7, Plaintiffs shall instead file a 16 || proposed order by the reply deadline. The submission shall be structured as outlined in = 17 || Attachment A below and include all relevant legal authority and analysis necessary to establish the 18 || case. Plaintiffs shall also email the proposed findings in Microsoft Word (.docx) format to 19 || kawpo@cand.uscourts.gov. No chambers copies of the proposed order need to be submitted. 20 Plaintiffs are ordered to serve this notice upon all other parties in this action. 21 IT IS SO ORDERED. 22 Dated: March 10, 2020 . 23 sath | asin □ ANDIS A. WESTMORE 24 United States Magistrate Judge 25 26 27 28 1 ATTACHMENT A 2 * * * 3 INTRODUCTION 4 (Relief sought and disposition.) 5 I. BACKGROUND 6 (The pertinent factual and procedural background, including citations to the Complaint and 7 record. Plaintiff(s) should be mindful that only facts in the Complaint are taken as true for 8 purposes of default judgment; therefore, Plaintiff(s) should cite to the Complaint whenever 9 possible.) 10 II. LEGAL STANDARD 11 (Include the following standard) 12 Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 55(b)(2) permits a court to enter a final judgment in a case 13 following a defendant’s default. Shanghai Automation Instrument Co. v. Kuei, 194 F. Supp. 2d 14 995, 999 (N.D. Cal. 2001). Whether to enter a judgment lies within the court’s discretion. Id. at 15 999 (citing Draper v. Coombs, 792 F.2d 915, 924-25 (9th Cir. 1986)). 16 Before assessing the merits of a default judgment, a court must confirm that it has subject 17 matter jurisdiction over the case and personal jurisdiction over the parties, as well as ensure the 18 adequacy of service on the defendant. See In re Tuli, 172 F.3d 707, 712 (9th Cir. 1999). If the 19 court finds these elements satisfied, it turns to the following factors (“the Eitel factors”) to 20 determine whether it should grant a default judgment: 21 (1) the possibility of prejudice to the plaintiff, (2) the merits of plaintiff’s substantive claim, (3) the sufficiency of the complaint, (4) 22 the sum of money at stake in the action[,] (5) the possibility of a dispute concerning material facts[,] (6) whether the default was due 23 to excusable neglect, and (7) the strong policy underlying the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure favoring decision on the merits. 24 Eitel v. McCool, 782 F.2d 1470, 1471-72 (9th Cir. 1986) (citation omitted). Upon entry of default, 25 all factual allegations within the complaint are accepted as true, except those allegations relating to 26 the amount of damages. TeleVideo Sys., Inc. v. Heidenthal, 826 F.2d 915, 917-18 (9th Cir. 1987). 27 Where a default judgment is granted, the scope of relief “must not differ in kind from, or exceed in 1 amount, what is demanded in the pleadings.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(c). 2 III. DISCUSSION 3 A. Jurisdiction and Service of Process 4 (Include the following standard) 5 In considering whether to enter default judgment, a district court must first determine 6 whether it has jurisdiction over the subject matter and the parties to the case. In re Tuli, 172 F.3d 7 707, 712 (9th Cir. 1999) (“When entry of judgment is sought against a party who has failed to 8 plead or otherwise defend, a district court has an affirmative duty to look into its jurisdiction over 9 both the subject matter and the parties.”). 10 i. Subject Matter Jurisdiction 11 (Establish the basis for the Court’s subject matter jurisdiction, including citations to relevant case 12 law and United States Code provisions.) 13 ii. Personal Jurisdiction 14 (Establish the basis for the Court’s personal jurisdiction, including citations to relevant legal 15 authority, specific to each defendant. If seeking default judgment against any out-of-state 16 defendants, this shall include a minimum contacts analysis under Schwarzenegger v. Fred Martin 17 Motor Co., 374 F.3d 797, 802 (9th Cir. 2004)). 18 iii. Service of Process 19 (Establish the adequacy of the service of process on the party against whom default is requested, 20 including relevant provisions of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4.) 21 B. Application to the Case at Bar 22 (A detailed analysis of each individual Eitel factor, separated by numbered headings. Factors 2 23 (merits of substantive claims) and 3 (sufficiency of complaint) may be listed and analyzed under 24 one heading. Plaintiff(s) shall include citations to cases that are factually similar, preferably 25 within the Ninth Circuit.) 26 IV. RELIEF SOUGHT 27 (An analysis of any relief sought, including a calculation of damages, attorneys’ fees, etc., with 1 1. Damages 2 (As damages alleged in the complaint are not accepted as true, the proposed findings must 3 provide (a) legal authority establishing entitlement to such damages, and (b) citations to evidence 4 supporting the requested damages.) 5 2. Attorney’s Fees 6 (If attorney’s fees and costs are sought, the proposed findings shall include the following: (1) 7 Evidence supporting the request for hours worked, including a detailed breakdown and 8 identification of the subject matter of each person’s time expenditures, accompanied by actual 9 billing records and/or time sheets; (2) Documentation justifying the requested billing rates, such 10 as a curriculum vitae or resume; (3) Evidence that the requested rates are in line with those 11 prevailing in the community, including rate determinations in other cases of similarly complex 12 litigation, particularly those setting a rate for the plaintiff’s attorney; and (4) Evidence that the 13 requested hours are reasonable, including citations to other cases of similarly complex litigation 14 (preferably from this District). 15 3. Costs 16 (Any request for costs must include citations to evidence supporting the requested costs and 17 relevant legal authority establishing entitlement to such costs.) 18 V. CONCLUSION 19 (Disposition, including any specific award amount(s) and judgment.) 20 * * * 21 22 23 24 25 26 27