United States District Court, D. Oregon
OPINION AND ORDER
Michael J. McShane United States District Judge.
Joe Hand Promotions, Inc. moves this Court for a default
judgment and damages pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 55(b)(2).
Pl.'s Mot. 1-2, ECF No. 14. For the reasons set forth
below, Plaintiff's Motion for Default Judgment, ECF No.
14, is GRANTED.
brought this action against Defendants Marx Garcia-Nunez and
La Roquita Mexican Restaurant, Inc.-operating as La
Rockita-on August 7, 2018. Pl.'s Compl. 1-2, ECF No. 1.
Plaintiff alleges that Garcia-Nunez, by himself or through
his employees, directed or permitted La Rockita to intercept,
broadcast, and/or publish the Mayweather v. McGregor
Match (the “Broadcast”) on August 26, 2017.
Id. at 3-4. Plaintiff had exclusive distribution and
public performance rights for the Broadcast and entered into
sublicensing agreements with various entities in the State of
Oregon allowing them to publicly exhibit the Broadcast.
Id. at 4-5. Defendants did not enter into such an
agreement. See Id. at 7. Plaintiff alleges that
Defendants willingly and unlawfully intercepted, received,
and exhibited the program in violation of Title 47 U.S.C.
§ 605, et seq. and 47 17 U.S.C. § 504,
et seq. Id. at 7-8.
seeks $10, 000 in statutory damages under §
605(e)(3)(C)(i)(II), $25, 000 in enhanced statutory damages
under § 605(e)(3)(C)(ii), $10, 000 in statutory damages
under § 504(c)(1), $30, 000 in enhanced statutory
damages under § 504(c)(2), and $3, 972.50 in
attorney's fees and costs under 47 U.S.C. §
605(e)(3)(B)(iii) and 17 U.S.C. § 505. Pl's Mot. 2.
effectuated service on Defendants on August 31, 2018. ECF
Nos. 10 and 11. Plaintiff then filed and served on Defendants
a Motion for Entry of Default on February 5, 2019. ECF No.
12. This Court granted Plaintiff's Motion on March 19,
2019. ECF No. 13. Defendants have not filed any responsive
pleadings or notice of intent to appear. Plaintiff filed the
instant Motion for Default Judgment on April 19, 2019. ECF
defendant must file a responsive pleading within 21 days of
being served, or within 60 days if the defendant has timely
waived service. Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(a)(1). “When a party
against whom a judgment for affirmative relief is sought has
failed to plead or otherwise defend, and that failure is
shown by affidavit or otherwise, the clerk must enter the
party's default.” Fed.R.Civ.P. 55(a).
entering an order of default, the district court has
discretion to issue a default judgment. See Fed. R.
Civ. P. 55(b); DirecTV, Inc. v. Huynh, 503 F.3d 847,
852 (9th Cir. 2007), cert. denied, 555 U.S. 937
(2008). This Court has "considerable leeway as to what
it may require as a prerequisite to the entry of a default
judgment." TeleVideo Sys., Inc. v. Heidenthal,
826 F.2d 915, 917 (9th Cir. 1987) (per curiam) (footnote
omitted). This Court may take the complaint's
well-pleaded factual allegations as true, other than the
amount of damages. Id. at 917-18 (citation omitted);
Huynh, 503 F.3d at 854 (citations omitted); see
also Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(b)(6). “However, a
‘defendant is not held to admit facts that are not
well-pleaded or to admit conclusions of law.'”
Huynh, 503 F.3d at 854 (quoting Nishimatsu
Constr. Co. v. Houston Nat'l Bank, 515 F.2d 1200,
1206 (5th Cir. 1975)).
Entry of Default Judgment
considering an entry of default judgment, this Court examines
the seven Eitel factors:
(1) [T]he possibility of prejudice to the plaintiff; (2) the
merits of plaintiff's 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 ...