(PS) Aussieker v. TSHB, LLC

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaFebruary 29, 20242:22-cv-01886California839 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 MARK AUSSIEKER, No. 2:22-cv-01886-DAD-CKD (PS) 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND

RECOMMENDATIONS AND GRANTING IN

14 TSHB, LLC, et al., PART AND DENYING IN PART

PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR DEFAULT

15 Defendants. JUDGMENT 16 (Doc. Nos. 11, 15) 17 18 On October 21, 2022, plaintiff Mark Aussieker filed this civil action against defendants 19 TSHB, LLC and Nico Contreras. (Doc. No. 1.) The Clerk of the Court entered default as to 20 defendants because they were served with the summons and complaint and did not file a timely 21 answer, responsive pleading, or otherwise appear in this action. (Doc. Nos. 5, 6, 7.) On May 25, 22 2023, plaintiff filed the pending motion for default judgment. (Doc. No. 11.) This matter was 23 referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636 and Local Rule 302. 24 On February 1, 2024, the assigned magistrate judge issued findings and…

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.