Nasiri

Nasiri v. T.A.G. Security Protective Services Inc.

Good Law
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaMarch 10, 20205:18-cv-01170California1,321 words

Opinion

trial_court Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 8 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 9

10 ELIAS NASIRI, Case No. 18-cv-01170-NC 11 Plaintiff, ORDER DENYING MOTION 12 FOR DEFAULT JUDGMENT v. 13 Re: Dkt. No. 119

T.A.G. SECURITY PROTECTIVE

14 SERVICES INC., et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 In this lawsuit, plaintiff Elias Nasiri accuses Defendants of violating California and 18 federal labor laws. Although defendant T.A.G. Security Protective Services Inc. 19 (“T.A.G.”) initially appeared, its attorney has since withdrawn and, because T.A.G. cannot 20 represent itself in court, its answer has been stricken. See Dkt. No. 74. Nasiri now moves 21 for default judgment against T.A.G. See Dkt. No. 119. Nasiri’s motion, however, fails to 22 adequately explain how it arrived at its damages calculation. Accordingly, the Court 23 DENIES Nasiri’s motion for default judgment without prejudice. 24 I. Background 25 T.A.G. provides security services. See Dkt. No. 80 (“SAC”) ¶ 11. Between June 26 …

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.