Lewis

Lewis v. Zeno

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaFebruary 23, 20241:23-cv-00079California7,070 words

Opinion

trial_court Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 RICHARD LEWIS, Case No. 1:23-cv-00079-NODJ-BAM 12 Plaintiff, FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

REGARDING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR

13 v. DEFAULT JUDGMENT (Doc. 20) 14 HERBERT ZENO, et al., FOURTEEN (14) DAY DEADLINE 15 Defendants. 16 17 Currently pending before the Court is Plaintiff Richard Lewis’s (“Plaintiff”) motion for 18 default judgment against Defendant Herbert Zeno and Defendant Unknown Riders M.C. 19 (collectively, “Defendants”). (Doc. 20.) The motion was referred to the undersigned pursuant to 20 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. Defendants did not file an opposition to the 21 motion, and the time in which to do so has passed. L.R. 230(c) (“Opposition . . . to the granting 22 of the motion shall be in writing and shall be filed and served no later than fourteen (14) days 23 after the motion was filed”.) 24 On February 15, 2024, the Court vacated the hearing on this matter and indicated that the 25 motion would be taken under…

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.