BMO Bank N.A. v. Bring Transport Inc

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 9 BMO BANK N.A., Case No. 1:24-cv-00809-KES-EPG Plaintiff, ORDER PERMTTING SUPPLEMENTAL

BRIEF AS TO SERVICE

v. (ECF No. 12) 13 BRING TRANSPORT INC, et al., 14 Defendants.

This matter is before the Court on the motion for default judgment filed by Plaintiff BMO Bank N.A. (ECF No. 12). Despite the Court previously advising Plaintiff to “identify which service provisions govern and specify how they were satisfied,” Plaintiff has failed to do so in its motion for default judgment. (ECF No. 11, p. 2). Accordingly, the Court will permit Plaintiff to file a supplemental brief in support of its motion, specifically, to address how service was achieved on the two Defendants (1) Bring Transport Inc and (2) Gurpreet Singh Bring. 21 “Before assessing the merits of a default judgment,” a court must address certain 22 preliminary issues, such as “the adequacy of service on the defendant.” Forestiere v. Bazzi, No. 23 20-cv-03543-DMR, 2021 WL 2638052, at *2 (N.D. Cal. June 8, 2021),…