United States District Court, D. Oregon, Portland Division
OPINION AND ORDER
MICHAEL W. MOSMAN CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
matter comes before me on Plaintiff J & J Sports
Productions, Lie's Motion for Default Judgment by the
Court . For the reasons below, I GRANT the Motion as it
pertains to Defendant Republica Mexican Restaurant LLC, DENY
the Motion as it pertains to Defendant Natividad Silva, and
award statutory damages of $3, 000 and enhanced damages of
J & J Sports Productions is a California corporation that
held the exclusive commercial distribution rights to the
"Fight of the Century, " a boxing match between
Floyd May weather Jr. and Manny Pacquaio held on May 2, 2015
("the Mayweather/Pacquiao match"). Compl. 
¶ 20. Defendant Natividad Silva is the manager and owner
of Defendant Republica Mexican Restaurant LLC
("Republica"), a restaurant/club located in
Hillsboro, Oregon. Compl.  ¶¶ 9-13. J & J
Sports sent three private investigators to Republica on fight
night. Each of the investigators paid a cover charge of $
10-$ 15. Motion for Default Judgment , Ex. 1 at 9-16. Two
investigators observed TVs showing the under-card match
between 7:00-8:30 P.M., and one investigator observed TVs
showing the May weather/Pacquiao match after 9 P.M. Motion
, Ex. 1 at 9-16. The investigators estimated the capacity
of Republica to be 90-150 people, although the investigator
who saw the Mayweather/Pacquaio match estimated there were
180-200 people in the bar at the time. Motion , Ex. 1 at
J Sports brought claims against Republica for violations of
the Communications Act of 1934, 47 U.S.C. § 605, the
Cable & Television Consumer Protection and Competition
Act of 1992, 47 U.S.C. § 553, and for trespass to
chattels under Oregon law, alleging that Republica and Silva
did not pay for access to the Mayweather/Pacquaio match.
Personal service was effected on Natividad Silva and on
Republica via Natividad Silva on May 16, 2017 . Neither
defendant answered or otherwise appeared, and I granted J
& J Sports's Motion for Entry of Default on August
14, 2017. . J & J Sports now seeks a default judgment
in the amount of $49, 000 under 47 U.S.C. § 605 and for
trespass to chattel. Motion . Specifically, J & J
seeks $10, 000 in statutory damages and $30, 000 in enhanced
damages under 47 U.S.C. § 605, and $9, 000 in actual
damages for trespass to chattels. Motion .
the entry of default, the court may grant default judgment
and award damages. Fed.R.Civ.P. 55(b)(2). "The district
court's decision whether to enter a default judgment is a
discretionary one." Aldabe v. Aldabe, 616 F.2d
1089, 1092 (9th Cix. 1980). "The general rule of law is
that upon default the factual allegations of the complaint,
except those relating to the amount of damages, will be taken
as true." Geddes v. United Fin. Grp., 559 F.2d
557, 560 (9th Cir. 1977) (per curiam). "Thus, the court
must accept plaintiffs facts in the complaint as true, but
the plaintiff must prove damages." Joe Hand Prods.
Inc. v. Holmes, No. 2:12-CV-00535-SU, 2015 WL 5144297,
at *3 (D. Or. Aug. 31, 2015) (citing TeleVideo Sys., Inc.
v. Heidenthal, 826 F.2d 915, 917-18 (9th Cir. 1987)).
court may consider the following factors when deciding
whether to grant a default judgment:
(1) the possibility of prejudice to the plaintiff, (2) the
merits of plaintiffs substantive claim, (3) the sufficiency
of the complaint, (4) 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 excusable neglect,
and (7) the strong policy underlying the Federal Rules of
Civil Procedure favoring decisions on the merits.
Eitel v. McCool, 782 F.2d 1470, 1471-72 (9th Cir.
1986). I take each of these factors in turn.
Factor one: the possibility of prejudice to the
have found this factor favors default judgment where the
plaintiffs only available legal remedy is the default
judgment, and, without such a judgment, plaintiff would be
left without any recourse for recovery. "Joe Hand
Prods., 2015 WL 5144297, at *3. Here, defendants have
not entered the case or responded in any way, and J & J
Sports's only legal remedy is a default judgment. The
first factor supports an entry of default judgment.
Factors two and three: the merits of plaintiffs substantive
claim and the sufficiency of the complaint.
courts often consider these two factors together, because
"[t]he Ninth Circuit has suggested that these two
factors [both] require that a plaintiff 'state a claim on
which the [plaintiff] may recover.'" PepsiCo,
Inc. v. Cal. Sec. Cans,238 F.Supp.2d 1172, 1175 (CD.
Cal. 2002) (quoting Banning v. Lavine, 572 ...