Chun
Baskin-Robbins Franchising LLC v. Chun
Opinion
trial_court Opinion
1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 SAN JOSE DIVISION 7 8 BASKIN-ROBBINS FRANCHISING LLC, Case No. 5:18-cv-05476-BLF et al., 9 Plaintiffs, ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFFS’ 10 MOTION FOR ATTORNEYS’ FEES v. AND COSTS 11 ALAN A. CHUN, [Re: ECF 33] 12 Defendant. 13 14 This case arises from allegations of breach of a franchise agreement, trademark 15 infringement, and unfair competition. See generally Compl. ¶¶ 1, 36–58, ECF 1. Alan A. Chun 16 (“Defendant”) has failed to appear, and in July 2019 this Court granted in part and denied in part 17 Baskin-Robbins and BP IP LLC’s (collectively, “Plaintiffs”) Motion for Default Judgment. See 18 Mot. for Default J., ECF 19; Order Granting in Part and Denying in Part Pl.’s Mot. for Default J. 19 (“Prior Order”) 2–3, 16, ECF 29; Order Entering Permanent Inj. Against Def. Alan Chun (“Order 20 Entering Inj.”), ECF 30; Judgment, ECF 31. Now before the Court is Plaintiffs’ Motion for 21 Attorneys’ Fees and Costs (“Motion”). For the…