Komar
Project Sentinel v. Komar
Opinion
Trial Court Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 PROJECT SENTINEL, No. 1:19-cv-00708-DAD-EPG Plaintiff, v. ORDER PERMITTING PLAINTIFF TO
PROVIDE ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
JEANETTE KOMAR and SARAH CONCERNING DAMAGES
KOMAR,
15 Defendants. 16 Pending before the Court is Plaintiff Project Sentinel’s (“Plaintiff’s”) motion for a default judgment against Defendants Jeanette Komar and Sarah Komar (“Defendants”). (ECF No. 68). In order to receive damages in a default judgment, a plaintiff is required to prove all damages sought in the complaint. See TeleVideo Sys., Inc. v. Heidenthal, 826 F.2d 915, 917–18 (9th Cir. 1987). “[A] default judgment must be supported by specific allegations as to the exact amount of damages asked for in the complaint.” Philip Morris USA, Inc. v. Castworld Prod., Inc., 219 F.R.D. 494, 499 (C.D. Cal. 2003). A court looks to plaintiff’s “declarations, calculations, and other documentation of damages in determining if the amount at stake is reasonable.” United 25 …