Handian

Handian v. Shepard

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaApril 3, 20231:22-cv-01269California595 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 8 HAROUT HANDIAN, Case No. 1:22-cv-01269-ADA-EPG Plaintiff, v. ORDER SETTING DEADLINE RE:

DEFAULT JUDGMENT

MARK SHEPARD, et al.,

Defendants. (ECF Nos. 22, 23)

15 16 Plaintiff filed this action on October 5, 2022, alleging that Defendants Mark Shepard and 17 Susan Tarner violated the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act. (ECF No. 1). Defendant Shepard 18 has filed an answer; however, Defendant Tarner has not appeared to defend this case, leading Plaintiff to request and obtain a clerk’s entry of default against Defendant Tarner. (ECF Nos. 15, 22, 23). Given the clerk’s entry of default, the Court will set a deadline for Plaintiff to move for default judgment under Rule 55(b)(2).1 Additionally, the Court advises Plaintiff of the following basic requirements for a motion for default judgment.2 The motion must establish proper service on Defendant Tarner and the Court’s jurisdiction. In re Tuli, 172 F.3d 707, 712 (9th Cir. 1999)…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.