Acosta
Acosta v. Parra Perez
Opinion
Trial Court Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 JOSE ACOSTA, Case No. 1:19-cv-01224-AWI-EPG Plaintiff, v. ORDER PERMITTING PLAINTIFF TO
PROVIDE SUPPLEMENTAL BRIEFING IN
MARIA DEL CARMEN PARRA PEREZ, SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR DEFAULT et al., JUDGMENT 15 Defendants.
17 Pending before the Court is Plaintiff Jose Acosta’s (“Plaintiff”) motion for default 18 judgment against Defendants Thu Huynh, Ngoc Tran, and THNBT LLC (“Defendants”). (ECF 19 No. 58.) As discussed below, the Court will grant Plaintiff leave to submit further supplemental 20 briefing in support of his motion. 21 A. Eitel Factors 22 Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 55 permits the Court to enter default judgment following 23 a defendant’s default. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 55(b). Whether to enter a default judgment lies within 24 the court’s discretion. Draper v. Coombs, 792 F.2d 915, 924-25 (9th Cir. 1986). The Ninth 25 Circuit has enumerated the following factors (collectively, the Eitel factors) that a court may 26 consider in determining…